alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022207EN.01004702.xml

| 23.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 207/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 207/47

---

Action brought on 28 March 2022 — Transformers Manufacturing Company v EUIPO — H&F (TMC TRANSFORMERS)

(Case T-163/22)

(2022/C 207/63)

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Transformers Manufacturing Company Pty Ltd (Melbourne, Australia) (represented by: F. Caricato, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: H&F Srl (Milan, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for the EU figurative mark TMC TRANSFORMERS — Application for registration No 17 262 668

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 February 2022 in Case R 1211/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | first of all and principally, acknowledge H&F Srl’s lack of capacity and declare the proceedings at first and second instance before EUIPO inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

—

first of all and principally, acknowledge H&F Srl’s lack of capacity and declare the proceedings at first and second instance before EUIPO inadmissible;

| — | alter the contested decision on the ground that it is unfounded in fact and law and based on insufficient reasoning; |
| --- | --- |

—

alter the contested decision on the ground that it is unfounded in fact and law and based on insufficient reasoning;

| — | in the alternative, overturn the contested decision on the ground that it is unfounded in fact and law and refer the action back to EUIPO; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, overturn the contested decision on the ground that it is unfounded in fact and law and refer the action back to EUIPO;

| — | order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs for the three stages of legal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the intervener to pay the costs for the three stages of legal proceedings.

Pleas in law

| — | Lack of capacity to bring proceedings on the part of H&F Srl, a matter on which EUIPO did not rule and for which it did not provide sufficient reasons; |
| --- | --- |

—

Lack of capacity to bring proceedings on the part of H&F Srl, a matter on which EUIPO did not rule and for which it did not provide sufficient reasons;

| — | Incorrect assessment of the likelihood of confusion (Article 8 of Regulation No 207/2009) in fact and in law; |
| --- | --- |

—

Incorrect assessment of the likelihood of confusion (Article 8 of Regulation No 207/2009) in fact and in law;

| — | Failure to state sufficient reasons for the contested decision. |
| --- | --- |

—

Failure to state sufficient reasons for the contested decision.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S
FORM 10-Q FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER ENDED JUNE 28, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-28-1997
<CASH>                                          11,375
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,393
<ALLOWANCES>                                       426
<INVENTORY>                                     23,977
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                67,543
<PP&E>                                          23,071
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,137
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  83,533
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,211
<BONDS>                                          9,452
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            97
<OTHER-SE>                                      47,545
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    83,533
<SALES>                                         39,408
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                39,408
<CGS>                                           30,292
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,292
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,194
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     7
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 189
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (274)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (83)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (191)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (191)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.03)
        

</TABLE>
!
"#
	!   $$$
$%&%'%()%*$+(,$+'%-%'%./)+()%0%,$$12%*345(*5')5()%'(*'%6+',4(63-%)+()%00+345(5&3-%*%!
"#,74(4*3'+348%%+*2'%**-520,.%+,,'%**%,353-%+9904)+.0%5' 
484*45($
$,,4345(+09%'*5((%0624,+()%'%6+',4(63-%4790%7%(3+345(5&'%&%'%()%$:400.%92.04*-%, $$

+84,+'+3+;577+(,%';%'*5((%0%'84)%%(3%';*%(,*$$(3%'(%3'%0%+*%(53+23-5'4<%,$

Exhibit 1

Case 4:22-cv-00825-P Document 65-1 Filed 01/30/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 1373
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-1772
ESTHER FOSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RENFRO CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. No. 08-1193
ESTHER FOSTER, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. RENFRO CORPORATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge; Bruce H. Hendricks, Magistrate Judge. (7:07-cv-00124-HFF) Submitted: April 24, 2008 Decided: April 28, 2008 Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.- 2 - Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Esther Foster, Appellant Pro Se. Cara Yates Crotty, CONSTANGY, BROOKS & SMITH, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 3 - PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Esther Foster appeals the district court’s denial of her motions to remand and to appoint counsel and the court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing her civil complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Foster v. Renfro Corp. , No. 7:07-cv-00124-HFF (D.S.C. May 2, 2007; Jan. 29, 2008). We deny Foster’s motion to appoint counsel and deny as moot Renfro Corporation’s motion to dismiss. 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.

AFFIRMED
<page>
										EXHIBIT 31.01



CERTIFICATIONS


I, Jeffrey A. Rothman, President of Demeter Management Corporation
("Demeter"), the general partner of the registrant, certify that:


1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the
registrant;

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 registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant'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 changes in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting; and

<page>
5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of Demeter's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

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
registrant'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
registrant's internal control over financial reporting.







Date:   August 16, 2004        /s/	Jeffrey A. Rothman
                                  	Jeffrey A. Rothman
                               	  	President,
	  	Demeter Management Corporation,
                                  	general partner of the registrant
Case 3:22-cr-00054-N Document 12 Filed 02/02/22 Page 1 of 3 PageID 23
Case 3:22-cr-00054-N Document 12 Filed 02/02/22 Page 2 of 3 PageID 24
Case 3:22-cr-00054-N Document 12 Filed 02/02/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID 25
Exhibit 35.12










Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation
60 WALL ST
NEW YORK, New York 10005-2836







RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for COMM
2015-CCRE24 Mortgage Trust
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates



Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August
1, 2015 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator
("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2015 (the "Reporting Period"):



(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period
and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and



(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review,
Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.







February 29, 2016







|               |                    
|-------------- | -------------------
|BRIAN SMITH    | Jeffrey Coletta    
|Vice President | Assistant Secretary
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Texas

Dallas

USA )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Case Number: 3:22−mj−00884−BK

)

Raynaldo Rivera Ortiz, Jr. )

Defendant. )

ORDER OF TEMPORARY COMMITMENT

On this date the defendant made an initial appearance after having been arrested in this

district for an offense against the laws of the United States.

The government moved for a hearing to determine whether any condition or combination of

conditions will reasonably assure the defendant's appearances and the safety of any other person

and the community (18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), as amended P.L. 98−473, 98 Stat. 1873).

Counsel for the defendant moved for a continuance of such hearing. IT IS, THEREFORE,

ORDERED that the hearing is to be held on 9/19/2022 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate

Judge David L. Horan, unless extended for good cause.*

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant is committed to the custody of the United

States Marshal for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons

awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal, pending the above scheduled

detention hearing.

A copy of this order shall be transmitted to counsel for the parties.

SIGNED 9/16/2022.

Renee Harris Toliver

Magistrate Judge

* A continuance on behalf of the government will be granted without a hearing only upon the written consent of

the Defendant or his attorney. A continuance on behalf of the Defendant will be granted without a hearing upon

the written request of the Defendant or his attorney. Continuances shall not exceed five work days from the

original setting for the Detention Hearing.

Case 3:22-mj-00884-BK Document 7 Filed 09/16/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 26
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 14 ,

2020 .

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14
- 20
- 00062
- CV
JANINE SCHORR MORRISON AND ANN
- MARIE SEPUKA , Appellant s V. TNG BENEFITS, LLC D/B/A THE NOBLE GROUP , Appellee On Appeal from the 434th Judicial District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 19
- DCV
- 266198

MEMORANDUM OPINION This is an interlocutory appeal from a n order signed January 6, 2020

. Janine Schorr Morrison and Ann

- Marie Sepuka fil ed separate notices of appeal. Morrison. On March 2 6 , 2020, Morrison filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1 (a)(1) . The motion is granted. Sepuka . Sepuka filed her notice of appeal on January 24, 2020. Our records show that Sepuka has not paid the appellate filing fee, and no evidence that she is2

excused by statute or the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure from paying costs has been filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 5; Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 51.207. On March 10, 2020, this court ordered Sepuka to pay the appellate filing fee on or before March 20, 2020, or the appeal would be dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c) (allowing involuntary dismissal of case because ap pellant has failed to comply with notice from clerk requiring response or other action within specified time). Sepuka has not paid the appellate filing fee. This appeal is dismissed under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1) as to Morrison and un der Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c) as to Sepuka. PER CURIAM Panel c onsists of Justices Christopher, Wise, and Zimmerer

.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

Alternative Dispute Resolution Summary 

Provider must file completed form, in duplicate, with the U.S. District Clerk upon 

completion of ADR. 

1. Civil Action number: 3:22-CV-01840-K 

2. Style of case: JASON WALTERS V. EXEL, INC. D/B/A DHL SUPPLY CHAIN 

3. Nature of suit: Employment 

4. Method of ADR used:  Mediation Mini-Trial  Summary Jury Trial 

5. Date ADR session was held: 8/14/2023 

6. Outcome of ADR (Select one): 

 Parties did not use my services.  Settled, in part, as result of ADR 

 Settled as a result of ADR. XX Parties were unable to reach settlement.

 Continue to work with parties to reach settlement (Note: provider must file supplemental ADR 

Summary Form at conclusion of his/her services) 

7. What was your TOTAL fee: $1800.00 

8. Duration of ADR: Half Day (i.e., one day, two hours) 

9. Please list persons in attendance (including party association, i.e., defendant, plaintiff): 

(Provider) 

Courtenay L. Bass , Mediator Theanna Bezney, Esq.-Defendant

Jason Walters -Plaintiff Andrew Etter – Defendant’s Rep.

Harry Bob Whitehurst, Esq.-Plaintiff

Please provide the names, addresses, and telephone number of counsel on the reverse of this form. 

Provider information: 

VÉâÜàxÇtç _A Utáá VÉâÜàxÇtç _A Utáá August 14, 2023 

Signature Date 

 

12001 N. Central Expressway, Suite 650, Dallas, Texas 75243 (214)303-4500 

Address Telephone 

Case 3:22-cv-01840-K Document 46 Filed 08/14/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 660
Harry Bob Whitehurst, Esq. 

Whitehurst & Whitehurst 

5380 Old Bullard Road 

Suite 600-363 

Tyler, TX 75703 

(903) 593-5588 

(214) 853-9382

Theanna Bezney, Esq. 

Fisher & Phillips LLP 

500 N. Akard Street 

Suite 3550 

Dallas, TX 75201 

(214) 220-9100 

(214) 220-9122 

Case 3:22-cv-01840-K Document 46 Filed 08/14/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 661
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § 2:22-CR-00099-Z-BR

§

DEVIN LATIFF BROWN (1) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

DEVIN LATIFF BROWN (1), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 1997), 

has appeared before me pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Indictment. After 

cautioning and examining DEVIN LATIFF BROWN (1) under oath concerning each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, 

I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the offense charged is supported by an 

independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I therefore recommend that the plea of 

guilty be accepted, and that DEVIN LATIFF BROWN (1) be adjudged guilty of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(C) 

- POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE METHAMPHETAMINE and have sentence imposed accordingly. 

After being found guilty of the offense by the District Judge,

☒ The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1) unless the Court finds by clear and 

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community 

if released.

☐ The Government does not oppose release.

☐ The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

☐ I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other 

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ The Government opposes release.

☐ The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

☐ If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the 

Government.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) unless (1)(a) the Court finds there is a 

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has 

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown 

under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be detained, and (2) the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence 

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released.

Date: June 9, 2023

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its 

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States 

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

Case 2:22-cr-00099-Z-BR Document 41 Filed 06/09/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 128
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 415 Received in Senate (RDS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 415

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           September 30 (legislative day, September 12), 1994

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
 Designating the week beginning October 16, 1994, as ``National Penny 
                            Charity Week''.

Whereas 170 billion pennies--$1.7 billion--are circulating in the economy;
Whereas financial institutions, merchants, and retail establishments are 
        reporting a shortage of pennies;
Whereas this shortage is a result of American people hoarding their pennies;
Whereas, during fiscal year 1994, the United States Mint will spend $1.64 
        million produce 13.3 billion pennies in order to counter the effect of 
        hoarding;
Whereas donating hoarded pennies to charities provides the charities with funds, 
        diminishes the shortage of pennies, lowers the demand on the United 
        States Mint to produce additional pennies, and ultimately saves the 
        United States Treasury money;
Whereas Penny Lover's of America is a not-for-profit charitable organization 
        that seeks to promote character, scholarship, and patriotism among 
        America's youth by collecting penny donations to finance their 
        educational pursuits;
Whereas Penny Lover's of America is celebrating its 10th anniversary this year 
        by conducting a penny recycling campaign; and
Whereas ``National Penny Charity Week'' coincides with Penny Lover's of 
        America's ``National Penny Campaign Recycling Project'' both of which 
        will assist in alleviating the penny shortage and raise funds for 
        charitable and community causes: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,
That the President is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation 
designating the week of October 16, 1994, as ``National Penny Charity 
Week'' and to call on the people of the United States to observe such 
week with appropriate ceremonies and activities, including the donation 
of pennies to charities, particularly to those which provide direct 
services to the nation's underprivileged and disadvantaged population, 
and to worthy community causes.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 30, 1994.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
# United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 16-1700
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee,

v. JULIO CUETO-NÚÑEZ,
Defendant, Appellant.

**ERRATA SHEET** The opinion of this Court issued on August 25, 2017, is amended as follows: Page 17, line 22: Change "Id." to "Id." Page 17, line 24: Delete "[Blue Br. 30]"
Exhibit 32.1



Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley act of 2001.



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





In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Andean Development Corporation (the "Company") on Form  10-QSB for the  period  ended June 30, 2004,  as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Lance Larsen, President of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001, that:



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



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



Dated:  August 16, 2004



/s/ Lance Larsen _____________

Lance Larsen, CEO