alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2005115EN.01002401.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/24

---

Action brought on 24 February 2005 by Omega, S.A. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-90/05)

(2005/C 115/46)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 24 February 2005 by Omega, S.A., established in Bienne (Switzerland) represented by P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocon.

Omega Engineering, Inc., established in Stamford, Connecticut (USA) was also a party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal dated 10 December 2004 in case R 330/2002-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal dated 10 December 2004 in case R 330/2002-2;

| — | Order that the Office shall bear the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order that the Office shall bear the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

| Applicant for Community trade mark: | The applicant |
| --- | --- |
| Community trade mark concerned: | Figurative mark OMEGA for goods and services in classes 3, 9, 14, 16, 25, 28, 35, 37, 38, 41 and 42 application No 225 771 |
| Proprietor of mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | Omega Engineering Inc. |
| Trade mark or sign cited in opposition: | National word and figurative marks OMEGA, MICROMEGA, OMEGA.COM, OMEGASOFT, OMEGANET for goods in classes 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 35, 41, and 42 |
| Decision of the Opposition Division: | Refusal of registration for goods and services in classes 9 and 42 |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |
| Pleas in law: | Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1) |

Applicant for Community trade mark:

The applicant

Community trade mark concerned:

Figurative mark OMEGA for goods and services in classes 3, 9, 14, 16, 25, 28, 35, 37, 38, 41 and 42 application No 225 771

Proprietor of mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Omega Engineering Inc.

Trade mark or sign cited in opposition:

National word and figurative marks OMEGA, MICROMEGA, OMEGA.COM, OMEGASOFT, OMEGANET for goods in classes 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 35, 41, and 42

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Refusal of registration for goods and services in classes 9 and 42

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Appeal dismissed

Pleas in law:

Misapplication of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1)

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20.12.1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ L 11, p. 1).

1

---
# C_2005006EN.01001602.xml

| 8.1.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/16

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fourth Chamber)

of 28 October 2004

in Case C-460/03: Commission of the European Communities v Ireland (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2000/53/EC - End-of-life vehicles - Failure to implement)

(2005/C 6/29)

Language of the case: English

In Case C-460/03: action under Article 226 EC for failure to fulfil obligations, brought on 31 October 2003, between Commission of the European Communities (Agents: X. Lewis and M. Konstantinidis) and Ireland (Agent: D. O'Hagan) - the Court (Fourth Chamber), composed of: J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, acting as President of the Fourth Chamber, E. Juhász and E. Levits (Rapporteur), Judges; M. Poiares Maduro, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 28 October 2004, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on end-of life vehicles, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive and in particular Article 10(1) thereof; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on end-of life vehicles, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive and in particular Article 10(1) thereof;

| 2. | Orders Ireland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ireland to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 304 of 13.12.2003

1

---
1

 The HONORABLE ORTRIE D. SMITH, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-1684

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff - Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Western District of Missouri.

*

Dale G. Lucas, Jr., * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Defendant - Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 11, 2010

Filed: January 25, 2010

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, JOHN R. GIBSON and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

In 2006, Dale G. Lucas, Jr., pleaded guilty to possessing with intent to distribute

crack cocaine. The district court determined an advisory guidelines sentencing range

of 130-162 months and sentenced Lucas to 130 months in prison. After the Sentencing

Commission reduced by two levels the offense level applicable to crack cocaine

offenses in Amendments 706, 711, and 713 to the Guidelines, Lucas moved for

modification of his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The district court1

 granted

a two-level reduction, reducing the advisory range to 110-137 months, and re-
2

 We note that nearly every other circuit agrees with our decision in Starks. See,

e.g., United States v. Dillon, 572 F.3d 146, 148-50 (3d Cir.), cert. granted, --- S. Ct.

----, 2009 WL 2899562 (Dec. 7, 2009).

-2-

sentenced Lucas to 110 months in prison. The court noted: “The maximum

adjustment permitted is 2 levels, so the Court cannot grant the Defendant’s request for

a greater reduction.”

Lucas appeals, arguing that the district court erred when it considered the

Guidelines mandatory in applying § 3582(c)(2) and the policy statements in U.S.S.G.

§ 1B1.10. This argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Starks, 551

F.3d 839, 842 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 2746 (2009), that “neither the Sixth

Amendment nor [United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005),] prevents Congress

from incorporating a guideline provision as a means of defining and limiting a district

court’s authority to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c).” The district court correctly

applied 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) and U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(b)(2)(A) as construed in Starks,

which is binding on our panel. We reject Lucas’s contention that Spears v. United

States, 129 S. Ct. 840 (2009) -- a decision that did not mention § 3582(c)(2) -- permits

us to revisit the decision of another panel in Starks.

2

 Accordingly, we must affirm. 

______________________________
(491O-13-PI

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal A\'iation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

(Docket No. FAA-2008-1098; Dir~~torate Identifier 2008-NM-J08-AD;

105"1/ 24 -I')

Amendment 3~-**j t<fi 201O~i<*-**1 -

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 747-100, 747-100B,

747-100B SUD, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200F, 747-300, 747SR, and 747SP Series

Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-{():)

~ V>1,

,~

\\/,KIIO

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products lis

• mAUISIG

above. This AD requires adding two new indicator lights on a certain panel to inform t

m

captain and first officer of a low pressure condition in the left and right override/jettiso

pwnps of the center wing tanks. This AD also requires replacing the left and right

I NITIALSISIG

override/jettison switches on the M154 fuel con101 module on the P4 panel with )ATg

improved switches and doing the associated wiripg changes. This AD also requires, for 0

I Olm~(; SVMao"

certain airplanes, installation of a mounting bracket for the new indicator lights. This

NITIA1.SISIQ

also requires a revision to the maintenance program to incorporate airworthiness al

limitation No. 28-A WL-22. This AD also requires a revision to the airplane flight man

to advise the flightcrew what to do in the event that the pump low pressure light on the

flight engineer's panel does not illuminate when the pump is selected off. This AD w 0

prompted by fuel system reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We are issuing this

to prevent uncommanded operation of tho override/jettison pumps of the center wing

tanks, and failure to manually shut off the overriae/jettison pumps at the correct time,
Submitted on record and briefs October 19,

affirmed December 31, 1979

#### HERZMAN, Appellant, *v.*AINSWORTH, *Respondent.*

(No. 78-797-L-3, CA 13717)

607 P2d 744

Lee S. Werdell, Medford, filed the brief for appellant.

Stanley C. Jones, Klamath Falls, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Joseph, Presiding Judge, and Lee and Richardson, Judges.

JOSEPH, P.J.

*977JOSEPH, P.J.

This is a tort action to recover damages for tortious interference with the business relations of plaintiff and another person. The trial court ruled that there was no evidence of any damage to plaintiff and directed a verdict in favor of defendant. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment. His sole assignment of error is that the trial court’s directing a verdict was improper.

We have reviewed the record and agree that plaintiff failed to prove damages and therefore failed to prove all of the elements of the tort as most recently delineated in *Top Serv. Body Shop, Inc. v. Allstate Ins. Co.,*283 Or 201, 582 P2d 1365 (1977).

Affirmed.
<PAGE>   1



                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1


                              List of Subsidiaries
                              --------------------


SUBSIDIARY - DOING BUSINESS AS                           STATE OF INCORPORATION



Earth Care Products of America, Inc. (inactive)                Florida
Earth Care Products of Tennessee, Inc.                         Florida
Earth Care Products of the Midwest, Inc.                       Florida
Earth Care Products of New Jersey, Inc. (inactive)             Florida  
Clean Earth of New Castle, Inc.                                Delaware
Delaware Improvement Corp. (inactive)                          Delaware
Clean Earth In-Situ (inactive)                                 Delaware
Recycled Plastics Industries, Inc.                             Wisconsin
Advanced Remediation and Disposal Technologies, Inc.           Pennsylvania
Environmental Specialty Products, Inc.                         California
Integrated Technical Services, Inc.                            New Jersey
Enviroplastics Corporation                                     Delaware
Chesapeake Plastic Lumber, Inc.                                Delaware
Green Horizon Environmental, Inc.                              Pennsylvania
Waste Concepts, Inc.                                           Pennsylvania
#### Howell, Appellant, vs. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Company, Respondent.

For the appellant: *August C. Moeller,*attorney, and *Emmet Horan, Jr.,*of counsel, both of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Shcm, Muskat & Sullivan*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.5

    Amendment No. 1 to LSB Bancshares, Inc. 1996 Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan


         The Plan is amended as follows:

1. The first two sentences of Section 5.02 of the Plan is amended by replacing
them in their entirety with the following two sentences:

         "The maximum aggregate number of shares of Common Stock that may be
         issued under the Plan pursuant to the exercise of SARs and Options and
         the grant of Stock Awards is 750,000 shares. The maximum aggregate
         number of shares that may be issued under the Plan as Stock Awards is
         250,000 shares."

2. Except as hereby amended, the Plan will remain in full force and effect.

3. All capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meanings ascribed
to such terms in the Plan.

4. Options and SARs may be granted under the Plan with respect to additional
shares available under the Amendment upon the adoption of this Amendment by the
Board, provided that no Option or SAR with respect to such additional shares
shall be effective or exercisable unless the Amendment is approved by a majority
of the votes of the Company's shareholders, voting either in person or by proxy,
present, or represented, and entitled to vote, at a duly held shareholders'
meeting within twelve months of such adoption. Stock Awards of the additional
shares available under the Amendment may be granted under the Plan upon the
later of the adoption by the Board or approval by shareholders of the Amendment
in accordance with the preceding sentence.
HomeNRC LibraryFOIA & Privacy ActRecent FOIA Requests2022

# Recent FOIA Requests - April 2022

This page presents a chronological listing of the subject and reference number of each Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act (FOIA/PA) Request submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) during April 2022. For additional detail, see the Index of Closed FOIA/PA Requests by Subject.
i

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, May 6, 2022

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - January
          - February
          - March
          - April
          - May
          - June
          - July
          - August
          - September
          - October
          - November
          - December

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, May 6, 2022
Exhibit 99.1

                           CERTIFICATIONS 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 American Millennium
Corporation, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended January
31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), James E. Hamilton, President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, 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 result of operations of the Company.


March 24, 2003                        /s/ James E. Hamilton
                                          ---------------------
                                          James E. Hamilton
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer




<PAGE>


                                                             Exhibit 99.2

                           CERTIFICATIONS 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 American Millennium
Corporation, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended January
31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), Ronald J. Corsentino, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, 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 result of operations of the Company.


March 24, 2003                               /s/ Ronald J. Corsentino
                                             ------------------------
                                             Ronald J. Corsentino
                                             Chief Financial Officer
                                             (Principal Accounting Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, David A. Steinberg, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of InPhonic, Inc. (the Registrant), certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual
Report on Form 10-K, as amended, for the period ended December 31, 2006 of the Registrant (the Report):

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



/s/ DAVID A. STEINBERGName:

David A. SteinbergDate:

June 4, 2007
# C_2005142EN.01005001.xml

| 11.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/50

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3800 — BC Partners/Dometic)

(2005/C 142/10)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 1 June 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3800. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3800. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2027 

To amend title 40, United States Code, to include as part of the buildings 

and grounds of the National Gallery of Art any buildings and other 

areas within the boundaries of any real estate or other property interests 

acquired by the National Gallery of Art. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 6, 2017 

Mr. HARPER (for himself and Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To amend title 40, United States Code, to include as part 

of the buildings and grounds of the National Gallery 

of Art any buildings and other areas within the boundaries of any real estate or other property interests acquired by the National Gallery of Art. 

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


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2027 IH

1 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF BUILDINGS AND OTHER AREAS 

2 WITHIN BOUNDARIES OF REAL ESTATE OR 

3 OTHER PROPERTY INTERESTS ACQUIRED BY 

4 NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART. 

5 Section 6301(2) of title 40, United States Code, is 

6 amended— 

7 (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), 

8 by striking ‘‘The National Gallery of Art’’ and in9 serting ‘‘(A) The National Gallery of Art’’; 

10 (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), 

11 and (C) as clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), respectively; 

12 and 

13 (3) by adding at the end the following new sub14 paragraph: 

15 ‘‘(B) All other buildings, service roads, 

16 walks, and other areas within the exterior 

17 boundaries of any real estate or land or interest 

18 in land (including temporary use) that the Na19 tional Gallery of Art acquires and that the Di20 rector of the National Gallery of Art determines 

21 to be necessary for the adequate protection of 

22 individuals or property in the National Gallery 

23 of Art and suitable for administration as a part 

24 of the National Gallery of Art.’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE IN ITEM 1 ON PAGES 3 AND 4 OF THE COMPANY'S REPORT ON
FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          72,455
<SECURITIES>                                     4,504
<RECEIVABLES>                                   47,501
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,396
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               122,081
<PP&E>                                         151,277
<DEPRECIATION>                                  91,130
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 197,823
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          138,425
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                    (23,637)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   197,823
<SALES>                                        406,116
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               406,116
<CGS>                                          243,623
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  243,623
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               189,989
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (25,749)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (25,749)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (25,749)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)
        

</TABLE>