alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009282EN.01004901.xml

| 21.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/49

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 9 September 2009 — Wrigley v OHIM — Mejerigaarden (POLAR ICE)

(Case T-256/08) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

2009/C 282/94

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company (Chicago, United States) (represented by: M. Kinkeldey, S. Schäffler and A. Bognár, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: W. Verburg, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Mejerigaarden Holding A/S (Thisted, Denmark) (represented by: A. Ellermann Holmbom, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 April 2008 (Case R 845/2006-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Mejerigaarden Holding A/S and Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no further need to adjudicate on the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no further need to adjudicate on the action;

| 2. | The applicant is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the defendant; |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the defendant;

| 3. | The intervener is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The intervener is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 209, 15.8.2008.

1

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 122 (Wednesday, September 12, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1492]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

             RECOGNIZING VIRGINIA INDUSTRIES FOR THE BLIND

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. ROBERT HURT

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 12, 2012

  Mr. HURT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Virginia Industries 
for the Blind, an Ability One organization that began in 
Charlottesville that empowers blind and visually impaired Virginians in 
achieving their maximum level of employment and career development.
  With 19 locations throughout Virginia, the organization employs 
approximately 150 people, including over 100 whom are blind or visually 
impaired.
  In May, I had the opportunity to witness firsthand the good work that 
Virginia Industries for the Blind does for our local communities. 
Virginia Industries for the Blind operates retail stores on military 
bases and in federal buildings throughout Virginia. From making the 
mattresses used by our heroes in the United States Navy to the 
reflective vests that hard-working Virginians depend on for safety, 
Virginia Industries for the Blind gives back to our community in more 
ways than one.
  Today, I hope my colleagues will join me in commending Virginia 
Industries for the Blind for their service to our local communities.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2010024EN.01005203.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/52

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 24 November 2009 — Szomborg v Commission

(Case T-228/08) (1)

1

(Action for failure to act - Commission’s failure to present a scientific assessment within the prescribed period - Non-actionable measure - Not individually concerned - Inadmissibility)

2010/C 24/93

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Szomborg (Jastarnia, Poland) (represented by: R. Nowosielski, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: K. Banks and A. Szmytkowska, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action for failure to act, seeking a declaration that the Commission unlawfully failed to present within the prescribed period the scientific assessment provided for in Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2187/2005 of 21 December 2005 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures in the Baltic Sea, the Belts and the Sound, amending Regulation (EC) No 1434/98 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 88/98 (OJ 2005 L 349, p. 1)

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Mr Grzegorz Szomborg shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission of the European Communities. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Grzegorz Szomborg shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission of the European Communities.

---

(1)  OJ C 209, 15.08.2008.

1

---
Map Created: October 2009.

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census, SF3.

Relative High School Completion Rates in Appalachia, 2000

(County Rates as a Percentage of the U.S. Average)

A high school completion rate is the percentage of adults, 25 years 

and over, completing 12 years or more of school. The percent of 

the U.S. average is computed by dividing the county high school 

completion rate by the national average and multiplying by 100. 

The map uses critical breaks such as the national average to 

organize the data into groups of common values. 

0 50 100 

Miles 

GEORGIA 

ALABAMA 

MISSISSIPPI 

SOUTH 

CAROLINA 

NORTH CAROLINA 

VIRGINIA 

WEST 

VIRGINIA 

KENTUCKY 

OHIO ILLINOIS INDIANA 

WISCONSIN 

MICHIGAN 

DE 

NJ PENNSYLVANIA 

MARYLAND 

NEW YORK 

TENNESSEE

61.2% - 74.9% 

75.0% - 84.9% 

85.0% - 99.9% 

100.0% - 113.6% 

Percent of the U.S. Average 

U.S. average = 80.4% 

Appalachian average = 76.8% 

(Critical Breaks Classification)
combustionsurvey - Supplemental Submission of Information on Major Source Boiler Rule 

 

Please find attached additional data and information to inform EPA’s proposed reconsideration of the Major 

Source Boiler Rule as requested by Federal Register notice issued May 18, 2011 (76 Fed. Reg. 96 at 28662-64) 

and submitted on behalf of Eco Power Solutions (USA) Corp. 

 

We thank EPA for the opportunity to submit these data. 

Norman W. Bernstein, Member 

N.W. Bernstein & Associates, LLC 

800 Westchester Avenue, N319 

Rye Brook, NY 10573 

(914) 358-3500 

Web Site: www.nwbllc.com 

In accordance with Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, any discussion of a federal tax issue in this 

communication or in any attachment is not intended to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of 

avoiding federal tax penalties. 

This message may contain confidential information that is protected by the 

attorney-client privilege or otherwise. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, 

or taking of action in reliance on the contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this message in 

error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. Thank you. 

 

From: Norm Bernstein <nwbernstein@nwbllc.com>

To: <combustionsurvey@erg.com>

Date: 7/14/2011 2:00 PM

Subject: Supplemental Submission of Information on Major Source Boiler Rule

Attachments: Supplemental Submission of Information on Major Source Boiler Rule7-14-11.pdf

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\GGibson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4E1EF681DO... 8/2/2011
****
 **EXHIBIT
23.1**
 
 
 
 CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 
 We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 33-81214) pertaining to the Employee Stock Ownership Plan and Trust of
The Leather Factory, Inc. and the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-07147) pertaining to the 1995 Stock Option Plan of The Leather Factory, Inc.
of our report dated February 6, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of The Leather Factory, Inc. included in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.
 
 
 /s/ Hein
+ Associates LLP
 
 HEIN +
ASSOCIATES LLP
 
 
 Dallas,
Texas
 March 28,
2005
1 

RQ Summary – DRAFT DtD Assessment of Pyrethroids and Py

LOC Exceedances for non-listed species 

Chemical FW fish E/M Fish FW inverts E/M inve

Acute Chronic Acute Chronic Acute Chronic Acute 

Bifenthrin X X X X Cyfluthrin X LambdaCyhalothrin X X Cypermethrin X X X Deltamethrin X X X Esfenvalerate X X X Fenpropathrin* - - - Permethrin X X Pyrethrins 

* No DtD uses for fenpropathrin were identified
**Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 3 April 2009 – VDH Projektentwicklung and Edeka Rhein-Ruhr v Commission**

**(Case C‐387/08 P)**

Appeal – Action for declaration of failure to act – Directive 89/665/EEC – Failure by the Commission to implement the corrective mechanism under Article 3(2) of Directive 89/665/EEC – Natural and legal persons – Direct concern – Inadmissibility

Actions for failure to act – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them – Directive 89/665 (Arts 230, fourth para., EC and 232, third para., EC; Council Directive 89/665, Art. 3) (see paras 20-27)

**Re:**

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Appeal against the order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) in Case T-185/08 | VDH Projektenwicklung and Edeka Rhein-Ruhr | v | Commission | , by which that Court dismissed as manifestly inadmissible the action for a declaration that the Commission had unlawfully failed to act, on the ground that it failed, in relation to the conclusion of a public works contract and in relation to the award of a general commercial contract, to implement without delay the corrective mechanism provided for under Article 3 of Directive 89/665/EEC and to send the Federal Republic of Germany a notification under Article 3(2) of that directive – Action brought by natural and legal persons for a declaration of failure to act – Need for the measure regarding which the institution is alleged to have unlawfully failed to act to be of direct concern to the applicant. |

**Operative part:**

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

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | VDH Projektentwicklung GmbH and Edeka Handelsgesellschaft Rhein-Ruhr mbH shall bear their own costs. |
<PAGE>   1
                        REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                        ON FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES


To the Board of Directors of Philadelphia Consolidated Holding Corp.:


Our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Philadelphia Consolidated
Holding Corp. and Subsidiaries appearing in this Form 10-K also included an
audit of the financial statement schedules listed in the index on page 24 of
this Form 10-K. In our opinion, the financial statement schedules present
fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in
conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP



Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
February 11, 2000
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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.A signed original 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.
 /S/ R.H. DillonPrint Name:
    R.H. DillonTitle:
    Chief Executive OfficerDate: March 5, 2010/S/ James F. LairdPrint Name:
    James F. LairdTitle:
    Chief Financial OfficerDate: March 5, 2010
**Exhibit 15.1**

August 4, 2011 

The Board of Directors and Shareholders 

MCG Capital Corporation 

We are aware of theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-137565 and Form S-8 No. 333-167494) pertaining to the Third Amended and Restated 2006 Employee Restricted Stock Plan of MCG Capital Corporation and the ThirdAmended and Restated 2006 Non- Employee Director Restricted Stock Plan of MCG Capital Corporation of our report dated August 4, 2011 relating to the unaudited consolidated interim financial statements and schedules of MCG Capital Corporationincluded in its Form 10-Q for the three- and six- month periods ended June 30, 2011. 

/s/ERNST & YOUNG LLP
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4407 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.4407

                     One Hundred Fifteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
   3s101 Rockwell Street in Warrenville, Illinois, as the ``Corporal 
             Jeffrey Allen Williams Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CORPORAL JEFFREY ALLEN WILLIAMS POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 3s101 Rockwell Street in Warrenville, Illinois, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Corporal Jeffrey Allen Williams Post 
Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Corporal 
Jeffrey Allen Williams Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Magnano, Appellant.

— Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second and third degrees and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees. Among several issues raised is the contention that reversal is required because the verdict was tainted by improper juror discussions concerning defendant’s bad reputation and prior criminal conviction. We agree.

Although, as a general rule, a verdict may not be impeached by delving into the deliberations of a jury, an exception to that rule occurs in cases in which the jury’s verdict is alleged to be the product of improper outside influence *(People v De Lucia,*20 NY2d 275, 278-279; *see, People v Brown,*48 NY2d 388; *People v Huntley,*87 AD2d 488, *affd on other grounds*59 NY2d 868). Such improper influence includes a juror’s communication to fellow jurors of extrarecord facts concerning a defendant’s criminal record or prior bad acts *(People v Edger-*
      *640
      *ton,*115 AD2d 257, 258, *lv denied*67 NY2d 882). In such cases the juror becomes "an unsworn witness testifying to critical information without defendant being afforded his right of confrontation or cross-examination guaranteed by the 6th Amendment” *(People v Edgerton, supra,*at 258, citing *People v Brown, supra; People v De Lucia, supra; People v Huntley, supra).*In those circumstances, the violations of defendant’s rights must take precedence over the policy against impeachment of jury verdicts *(see, People v Edgerton, supra).*

In this case, two jurors testified at the CPL article 330 hearing that, during jury deliberations, a juror initiated a discussion of defendant’s bad reputation in the community and his prior conviction for selling untaxed cigarettes. Not only was there a "substantial risk” of prejudice to defendant as a result of introduction of those extrajudicial facts *(see, People v Brown, supra,*at 394; *see also, People v Huntley, supra,*at 492), but the lone holdout juror testified unequivocally that the extrarecord information affected her verdict. The cases teach that " '[i]t is the "nature of the matter and its probable effect on a hypothetical average jury” * * * which determines whether the defendant has been prejudiced’ ” *(People v Edgerton, supra,*at 258, quoting *United States ex rel. Owen v McMann,*453 F2d 813, 820, *cert denied*402 US 906). Clearly, the introduction of extraneous facts concerning defendant’s bad reputation and criminal acts was prejudicial to defendant, and he must be afforded a new trial.

We have considered the other issues raised by defendant and find them lacking in merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Cattaraugus County Court, Dadd, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 2nd Degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Lowery, JJ.
**Exhibit
      32.2**








KERR-McGEE
      CORPORATION


123
      Robert S. Kerr Avenue


Oklahoma
      City, Oklahoma 73102








**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**


**REGARDING
      PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING**


**FINANCIAL
      STATEMENTS**








I,
      Robert M. Wohleber, the Chief Financial Officer of Kerr-McGee Corporation (the
      "Issuer"), in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify in connection
      with
      the Issuer's Quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period that ended September
      30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report")
      that:





·
            the
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
                Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
                and




·
            information
                contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
                the
                financial condition and results of operations of the
                Issuer.








/s/
      Robert M. Wohleber


______________________





Robert
      M. Wohleber


Chief
      Financial Officer


November
      9, 2005
# C_2008272EN.01002702.xml

| 25.10.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 272/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 272/27

---

Action brought on 2 July 2008 — Global Digital Disc v Commission

(Case T-259/08)

(2008/C 272/53)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Global Digital Disc GmbH & Co. KG (Ottendorf-Okrilla, Germany) (represented by: D. Ehle, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Forms of order sought

| — | order the defendant to pay the applicant EUR 8 025 495,25 in damages plus 8 % interest from 1 January 2008 onwards; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the applicant EUR 8 025 495,25 in damages plus 8 % interest from 1 January 2008 onwards;

| — | declare that the defendant is under an obligation to compensate the applicant for damage incurred after 1 January 2008 and in the future, plus interest; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that the defendant is under an obligation to compensate the applicant for damage incurred after 1 January 2008 and in the future, plus interest;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant seeks compensation for damage it incurred because the Commission failed to impose provisional and definite anti-dumping duties on imports of recordable compact discs (‘CD-R’) from the People's Republic of China, Hong Kong and Malaysia and terminated the anti-dumping proceedings concerning those imports by decision of 3 November 2006 (1).

1

The applicant is a company based in Germany which produces CD-Rs and DVD-Rs.

In its application, the applicant claims that the defendant's administrative and normative conduct during, prior to and following the end of the anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of CD-Rs from the People's Republic of China, Hong Kong and Malaysia infringed — repeatedly and in a manner that was sufficiently serious — important provisions in anti-dumping law which are intended to confer rights on the applicant. Further, the applicant claims that those sufficiently serious infringements of the law on the part of the Commission caused the applicant significant damage. Finally, the applicant claims that there is a direct causal link between those serious infringements of the law and the damage that has already been caused and the damage still to be expected.

---

(1)  Commission Decision of 3 November 2006 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of recordable compact discs (CD+/-R) originating in the People's Republic of China, Hong Kong and Malaysia (OJ 2006 L 305, p. 15).

1

---
EXHIBIT 23



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-8, previously filed by NB&T Financial Group, Inc. on March 23, 1995, of our
report dated February 4, 2005 on our audit of the consolidated financial statements of NB&T Financial Group, Inc., as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004 which report and financial
statements are contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, and 2003.



/s/ BKD, LLPBKD, LLP




Cincinnati, Ohio

April 11, 2005



34