alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEAL S OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Elder, Bumgardn er and Lemons

DAVID R. BIRMINGHAM, JR. MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 02 19-99-4 PER CURIAM JUNE 8, 1999 CENTURY CONCRE TE, INC. AND PENNSYLVANIA MANUFACTURERS INDEMNITY INSU RANCE COMPANY

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION (David R. Birm ingham, Jr., pro se , on briefs). (John S. Nevin; Clar ke, Dolph, Rapaport, Hardy & Hull, P.L.C., on brief), for appellees.

David Birmingham (claimant) contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission (commission) erred in finding that he failed to prove that he was totall y disabled after May 19, 1998 as a result of his co mpensable Febr uary 26, 1997 inju ry by accident. Upon reviewing the re cord and the briefs of the parties, we conclude that this ap peal is withou t merit. Acco rdingly, we summarily affirm the commission 's decision. See Rule 5A:27. On appeal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party below. See R.G. Moore Bldg. Corp. v. Mullins , 10 Va. App. 211, 21 2, 390 S.E.2d 788, 78 8 (1990). Unless we can say as a matter of law that claimant 's evidence sustained

*Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code § 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.his burden of pr oof, the commissi on's findings are binding and conclusive upon us. See Tomko v. Michael’ s Plastering Co. , 210 Va. 697, 699, 173 S.E. 2d 833, 835 (1970). On February 26, 1997 , claimant sustained a compensabl e injury by accident to hi s face and both hands while workin g for employer. On April 7, 1998, Dr . Jon Loftus, an orth opedist who examined claimant for bilateral hand problems, opined that claimant was not a surgical candidate. Dr. Loftus referred claimant to a pain clinic. On May 19, 1998, claimant received a ster oid injection at the pain clinic from Dr. Emmanuel Nebab. On the May 19, 1998 Post-Procedure Discharge Form, Dr . Nebab discharged claimant and instructed him to return to his "n ormal activi ty," except for some minor protecti ve measures for his left hand. Based upon this me dical evidence , the commissi on, as fact finder, could reas onably infer that claimant was no longer totally disabled as of May 19 , 1998. Accordingly, we cannot say as a matter of law th at claimant's evidence sustained his burden of proof. 1 Therefore, we affirm the commis sion's decision. Affirmed.

1 On appeal, we did not consider any evidence that was not properly before the commission when it rendered its decision. Moreover, the commission did not err in refusing to consider Dr. Nebab's October 29, 1998 letter and Dr. Loftus's September 9, 1998 New York Workers' Compensation Board form as after-discovered evidence. Clearly, Dr. Nebab's opinion could have been obtained prior to the hearing by the exercise of due diligence, and Dr. Loftus's opinion was not relevant and would not have mandated a different result. - 2 -
IA

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 418

Designating October 19, 1994, as ‘‘National Mammography Day’’.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 28, 1994

Mrs. LLOYD (for herself, Mr. WALSH, Mr. SLATTERY, Mr. DELLUMS, Ms.

PELOSI, Mr. SAWYER, Mr. TANNER, Mr. HOCHBRUECKNER, Mr. FARR

of California, Mr. GORDON, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr.

CRAMER, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. COOPER, Mr. MAZZOLI, Mr. MCCRERY,

Mr. SANGMEISTER, Mr. BALLENGER, Mr. BLUTE, Mr. STEARNS, Ms.

DANNER, Mr. BEILENSON, Mr. BATEMAN, Mrs. MALONEY, Mrs. MEEK,

Mr. MINETA, Mrs. VUCANOVICH, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. VALENTINE, Mr.

BROWN of Ohio, Mr. BEVILL, Mr. ROEMER, Mr. DORNAN, and Mr.

STUDDS) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

JOINT RESOLUTION

Designating October 19, 1994, as ‘‘National Mammography

Day’’.

Whereas, according to the American Cancer Society, 182,000

women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in 1994, and

46,000 women will die from this disease;

Whereas, in the decade of the 1990’s, it is estimated that

about 2,000,000 women will be diagnosed with breast

cancer, resulting in nearly 500,000 deaths;
2

•HJ 418 IH

Whereas the risk of breast cancer increases with age, with 50

percent of the breast cancer cases occurring in women

over age 65;

Whereas 80 percent of women who get breast cancer have no

family history of the disease;

Whereas mammograms, when operated professionally at an

accredited facility, can provide a safe and quick diagnosis;

Whereas experts agree that mammography is the best method

of early detection of breast cancer, and early detection is

the key to saving lives; and

Whereas mammograms can reveal the presence of small cancers up to 2 years before regular clinical breast examinations or breast self-examinations, saving as many as a

third more lives; Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That October 19, 1994, is designated as ‘‘National Mam4 mography Day,’’ and the President is authorized and re5 quested to issue a proclamation calling on the people of

6 the United States to observe the day with appropriate pro7 grams and activities.

Æ
LOGO

Exhibit 35.2 ANNUAL COMPLIANCE STATEMENT CERTIFICATION Citigroup
Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-GC31 (the Trust) I, William A. Clarkson, on behalf of Torchlight Loan Services, LLC, as special servicer (the Certifying Servicer), certify to Citigroup
Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc. and its officers, directors and affiliates, and with the knowledge and intent that they will rely upon this certification, that: I (or Servicing Officers under my supervision) have reviewed the Certifying Servicers activities for the fiscal year 2018 (the Reporting
Period) and the Certifying Servicers performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement; and To the best of my knowledge, based on such
review, the Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all material respects during the Reporting Period. Date: February 28, 2019  TORCHLIGHT LOAN SERVICES, LLC, as Special
ServicerBy:

/s/ William A. ClarksonName: William A. ClarksonTitle: Authorized Signatory  280 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10017 T 212.883.2800 F 212.883.2560 E info@torchlightloanservices.com www.torchlightinvestors.com
Case 3:22-cv-01912-M-BH Document 14 Filed 12/08/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 58
# C_2021053EN.01006301.xml

| 15.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 53/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 53/63

---

Action brought on 22 December 2020 — Monster Energy v EUIPO — Frito-Lay Trading Company (MONSTER)

(Case T-758/20)

(2021/C 53/79)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Monster Energy Co. (Corona, California, United States) (represented by: P. Brownlow, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Frito-Lay Trading Company GmbH (Bern, Switzerland)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark MONSTER — European Union trade mark No 9 492 158

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2020 in Case R 2927/2019-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | annul the decision of the Cancellation Division of 22 October 2019 to the extent that it revoked the Registration for goods in Class 30; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Cancellation Division of 22 October 2019 to the extent that it revoked the Registration for goods in Class 30;

| — | dismiss the application for revocation of the Registration for goods in Class 30; |
| --- | --- |

—

dismiss the application for revocation of the Registration for goods in Class 30;

| — | order EUIPO to bear its own costs of the proceedings and pay those of the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to bear its own costs of the proceedings and pay those of the applicant.

Plea in law

| — | Incorrect application of Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Incorrect application of Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1








Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




The following statement is provided by the undersigned to accompany the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 of Hub Group, Inc. pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and shall not be deemed filed pursuant to any provision of the Exchange Act of 1934 or any other securities law.




Each of the undersigned certifies that the foregoing Report on Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Hub Group, Inc.








/s/ David P.Yeager
/s/ Terri A. PizzutoDavid P. Yeager
Terri A. PizzutoChairman and Chief Executive Officer
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and TreasurerHub Group, Inc.
Hub Group, Inc.
Court Documents from Arkema v. EPA

1.) Decision 2.) Joint Opening Brief from Arkema and Solvay 3.) Opening Brief from EPA 4.) Joint Response Brief from Arkema and Solvay 5.) Petition for Rehearing from EPA 6.) Joint Response to Petition from Rehearing from Arkema and Solvay 7.) Denial of Petition for Rehearing 8.) Issuance of the Circuit Court’s Mandate
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 28, 2021.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, September 28, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A22I0034. TERMINAL INVESTMENT CORP. d/b/a TICO v. DAVID T. SMALLS.

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

STCV2100617
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED
April 16, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-20300 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ROBERTO GARZA,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-03-M-165-2

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Roberto Garza appeals from an order of the district court
denying his motion to revoke the magistra te judge’s pretrial

detention order. The district court’s decision, which effectively

adopted the reasoning of the m agistrate judge, rests upon its

conclusion that Garza has not rebutted the presumption that no
condition or combination of conditions will reasonably assure the1 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) & (f).

2 S ee United States v. Rueben , 974 F.2d 580, 586 (5 t h Cir. 1992) (“[T]he risk of continued narcotics trafficking on bail does constitute a risk to the community.”).

2 safety of the community. 1 The district court’s conclusions are

supported by the record. 2

AFFIRMED.
# Official Journal C 264/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 264 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4931 October 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 264

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4931 October 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 264/1 | Final annual accounts of the European Communities — Financial Year 2005 — Volume I — Consolidated financial statements and consolidated reports on implementation of the budget | 1 |
| 2006/C 264/2 | Statement of assurance | 140 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2006/C 264/1

Final annual accounts of the European Communities — Financial Year 2005 — Volume I — Consolidated financial statements and consolidated reports on implementation of the budget

1

2006/C 264/2

Statement of assurance

140

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: The State of Texas v. Kei a rra Peterson

Appellate case number: 01

- 19

- 00137

- CR

Trial court case number: 1529626

Trial court: 177th District Court of Harris County

Appellee Keiarra Peterson filed a motion for en banc reconsideration of the Court’s August

25, 2020 opinion. The motion for en banc reconsideration is denied

.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Julie Countiss

Acting for the Court

En Banc Court consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Keyes, Lloyd, Goodman, Kelly,

Landau, Hightower, Countiss, and Adams.

Date: December 29, 2020
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 170

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States limiting

the number of consecutive terms a person may serve as a Representative

or Senator, which shall be known as the Citizen Representative Reform

Act New Blood Provision.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 31, 1993

Mr. NUSSLE (for himself, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, and Mr. INGLIS of

South Carolina) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States limiting the number of consecutive terms a person

may serve as a Representative or Senator, which shall

be known as the Citizen Representative Reform Act New

Blood Provision.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con-
2

HJ 170 IH

1 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

2 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

3 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several

4 States within seven years after the date of its submission

5 for ratification:

6 ‘‘ARTICLE—

7 ‘‘SECTION 1. No person may be elected to serve dur8 ing a term as a Representative if such person has served

9 as a Representative during each of the six terms imme10 diately preceding such term, except that no previous term

11 shall be counted in which the person served for less than

12 the entirety of such term.

13 ‘‘SECTION 2. No person may be elected or appointed

14 to serve during a term as a Senator if such person has

15 served as a Senator during each of the two terms imme16 diately preceding such term, except that no previous term

17 shall be counted in which the person served for less than

18 three years.

19 ‘‘SECTION 3. For purposes of this article, service as

20 a Representative or Senator in any term commencing be21 fore the ratification of this article is completed may not

22 be taken into account.’’.

Æ
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-0577V

Filed: July 12, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

LAURA M. FORCELLA SPIERING,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Special Processing Unit (SPU);

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA)

Richard H. Moeller, Moore, Heffernan, et al., Sioux City, IA, for petitioner.

Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On April 20, 2018, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2

(the “Vaccine 

Act”). Petitioner alleges that he received an influenza (“flu”) vaccination on November 

2, 2016, and subsequently suffered a shoulder injury as a result of the flu vaccination 

(“SIRVA”). Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the 

Office of Special Masters.

On June 28, 2019, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent states that “petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with 

 

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This 

means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine 

Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the 

disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned 

agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from 

public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this 

case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in 

accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management 

and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755.
SIRVA, as defined on the Vaccine Injury Table.” Id. at 4. Respondent further agrees 

that “petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine 

Act.” Id. at 3-4 (citing 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-13(a)(1)(B); 42 U.S.C. § 300aa11(c)(1)(D)(i)).

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
Case 4:22-cr-00274-P Document 124 Filed 10/19/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 356
Case 4:22-cr-00274-P Document 124 Filed 10/19/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 357
# C_2018142EN.01004901.xml

| 23.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/49

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 March 2018 — Recordati Orphan Drugs v EUIPO — Laboratorios Normon (NORMOSANG)

(Case T-103/17) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark NORMOSANG - Earlier national word mark NORMON - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Rule 19(2)(a)(ii) and Rule 20(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 7(2)(a)(ii) and Article 8(1) and (7) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430)))

(2018/C 142/65)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Recordati Orphan Drugs (Puteaux, France) (represented by: J. Quirin, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Laboratorios Normon, SA (Tres Cantos, Spain) (represented by: I. Gonzalez-Mogena Gonzalez, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 November 2016 (Case R 831/2016-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Laboratorios Normon and Recordati Orphan Drugs.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Recordati Orphan Drugs to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Recordati Orphan Drugs to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 121, 18.4.2017.

1

---
Case 4:22-cv-00772-O Document 1-4 Filed 08/29/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 22
Case 4:22-cv-00772-O Document 1-4 Filed 08/29/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 23
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ No. 1D 18

- 4358

_____________________________ C ITY OF T ALLAHASSEE , Appellant /Cross

- Appellee ,

v.
D EBRA F LEETWOOD , Appellee /Cross

- Appellant

.

_____________________________
On appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims

. Jacquelyn L. Newman , Judge

. Date of Accident: January 5, 2016. October 21, 2019

P ER C URIAM

. A FFIRMED

. L EWIS , W INOKUR , and J AY , JJ., concur
.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331
.

_____________________________2 Mary E. Cruickshank and Christopher J. DuBois of DuBois & Cruickshank, P.A., Tallahassee , for Appellant /Cross

- Appellee

. Paul M. Anderson of Anderson & Hart, P.A., Tallahassee , for Appellee /Cross

- Appellant

.