alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Submitted December 19, 2016,

reversed February 23, 2017

#### In the Matter of D. J., a Person Alleged to have a Mental Illness. STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*D. J., *Appellant.*

Marion County Circuit Court

16CC03460; A162481

389 P3d 412

Eric J. Deitrick and Multnomah Defenders, Inc., filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Jordan R. Silk, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and Lagesen, Judge.

*900PER CURIAM

The trial court committed appellant to the custody of the Oregon Health Authority for a period not to exceed 180 days after determining that he suffered from a mental disorder that rendered him a danger to himself and to others. ORS 426.130; ORS426.005(l)(f). On appeal, appellant argues that the record does not contain legally sufficient evidence to support that determination. The state concedes that the record is legally insufficient in that regard and that the order of commitment should be reversed. We agree and accept the state’s concession.

Reversed.
#### JACKSON, J. v. COPS MONITORING

1944 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/08/2017

February Term, 2015 No. 03319 (Philadelphia)

Affirmed
# C_2023179EN.01003901.xml

| 22.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/39

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 March 2023 — CIMV v Commission

(Case T-26/22) (1)

(Research and technological development - Grant agreement concluded in the context of the ‘Horizon 2020’ Framework Programme for Research and Innovation - Recovery of a debt - Repayment by instalments - Substantive accuracy of the facts - Manifest error of assessment - Obligation to state reasons - Legitimate expectations - Right to be heard - Proportionality)

(2023/C 179/56)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Compagnie industrielle de la matière végétale (CIMV) (Neuilly sur-Seine, France) (represented by: B. Le Bret, R. Rard and P. Renié, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Ilkova and S. Romoli, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Decision C(2021) 7932 final of 28 October 2021 concerning the recovery of an amount in the sum of EUR 5 888 214,59 plus late payment interest.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Compagnie industrielle de la matière végétale (CIMV) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Compagnie industrielle de la matière végétale (CIMV) to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 109, 7.3.2022.

---
# C_2022002EN.01005102.xml

| 3.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/51

---

Action brought on 8 November 2021 — ICA Traffic v Commission

(Case T-717/21)

(2022/C 2/71)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: ICA Traffic GmbH (Dortmund, Germany) (represented by: S. Hertwig and C. Vogt, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s decision in so far as the framework agreement with UVD Robots APS concerning delivery of up to 200 disinfection robots ceased to have effect when the maximum quantity was reached; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision in so far as the framework agreement with UVD Robots APS concerning delivery of up to 200 disinfection robots ceased to have effect when the maximum quantity was reached;

| — | 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

In support of the action, the applicant relies on the following plea in law.

The decision of the European Commission, notified in the press release of 21 September 2021, to procure a further 100 robots despite the fact that the framework agreement has ceased to have effect infringes the principle of legality under EU law, enshrined in primary law in the second paragraph of Article 263 TFEU in conjunction with Article 264 TFEU.

In Case C-23/20, (1) the European Court of Justice ruled that once the maximum quantity specified in the contract notice was reached, the framework agreement ceased to have effect. The decision of the European Commission to now order a further 100 disinfection robots, on the basis of the framework agreement with UVD Robots APS concerning delivery of up to 200 disinfection robots, infringes Article 49 of Directive 2014/24/EU (2) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC, and also Annex V, Part C, points 7, 8 and 10(a) in conjunction with Article 33 thereof and the principles of equal treatment and transparency set out in Article 18(1) of that directive.

---

(1)  Judgment of 17 June 2021, Simonsen & Weel, C-23/20, EU:C:2021:490.

(2)  OJ 2014 L 94, p. 65.

---
# C_2023024EN.01004101.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/41

---

Order of the General Court of 8 November 2022 — Growth Finance Plus v EUIPO (catlover)

(Case T-232/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark catlover - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2023/C 24/56)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Growth Finance Plus AG (Gommiswald, Switzerland) (represented by: H. Twelmeier, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Ringelhann and T. Klee, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 7 February 2022 (Case R 717/2020-5).

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Growth Finance Plus AG shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Growth Finance Plus AG shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 237, 2.6.2022.

---
# C_2023329EN.01002502.xml

| 18.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/25

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 July 2023 — Fibrecycle v EUIPO (BACK-2-NATURE)

(Case T-772/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark BACK-2-NATURE - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2023/C 329/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Fibrecycle Pty Ltd (Helensvale, Australia) (represented by: T. Stein, lawyer)

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

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 5 October 2022 (Case R 1699/2020-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the parties to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the parties to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 45, 6.2.2023.

---
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 17, 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, May 17, 2021

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21D0317. SOUTHERN PIEDMONT LAW, PC v. JIONEL E. PIERRE.

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

hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of 

this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record 

transmitted to the Court of Appeals.

LC NUMBERS:

2020V620
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 23

- 00316

- CV

35 BAR & GRILL LLC d/b/a San Antonio Men’s Club,

Appellant

v.

TEXAS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE COMMISSION

, Appellee

From the 13 1 st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2023

- CI

- 04177

Honorable Rosie Alvarado , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ

, JUSTICE RIOS , AND JUSTICE WATKINS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED. We order appel lant to pay the costs of this appeal.

SIGNED February 14, 2024.

_____________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 44 (Thursday, March 6, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10277]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5517]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics: Meeting

    Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Department of 
Health and Human Services announces the following advisory committee 
meeting.

    Name: National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS).
    Times and Dates: 9 a.m.-5:30 p.m., March 13, 1997; 9 a.m.-5:30 
p.m., March 14, 1997.
    Place: Room 703A, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20201.
    Status: Open.
    Purpose: The meeting will focus on the Committee's progress in 
addressing new responsibilities in health data standards and health 
information privacy as outlined in the administrative simplification 
provisions of P.L. 104-191, as well as on related matters. 
Departmental officials will brief the Committee on recent activities 
of the HHS Data Council, the status of HHS activities in 
implementing the administrative simplification provisions of P.L. 
104-191, and related data policy activities. The Committee is 
scheduled to hear reports from its subcommittees and work groups 
dealing with privacy and confidentiality, data standards and 
populations at risk.
    Information presentations are scheduled on conceptual frameworks 
for coding and classification, as well as on unique patient 
identifiers. The Committee also will discuss its priorities and work 
plans.
    Contact Person for More Information: Substantive program 
information as well as summaries of the meeting and a roster of 
committee members may be obtained from James Scanlon, NCVHS 
Executive Staff Director, Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Planning and Evaluation, DHHS, Room 440-D. Humphrey Building, 200 
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20201, telephone (202) 690-
7100, or Marjorie Greenberg, Acting Executive Secretary, NCVHS, 
NCHS, CDC, Room 1100, Presidential Building, 6525 Belcrest Road, 
Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, telephone 301/436-7050.

    Dated: February 28, 1997.
James Scanlon,
Director, Division of Data Policy.
[FR Doc. 97-5517 Filed 3-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4151-04-M
# C_2022359EN.01002301.xml

| 19.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/23

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Poland) lodged on 12 May 2022 — E. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej we Wrocławiu

(Case C-322/22)

(2022/C 359/24)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: E.

Respondent: Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej we Wrocławiu

Question referred

Do the principles of effectiveness, sincere cooperation and equivalence expressed in Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union ..., or any other relevant principle laid down in EU law, preclude a provision of national law such as Article 78 § 5(1) and (2) of the ustawa z 29 sierpnia 1997 r. Ordynacja podatkowa (Law of 29 August 1997 establishing the Tax Code) (consolidated text: Dz. U. of 2012, item 749, as amended), which provides that interest on overpaid tax which is collected by a paying agent in a manner not consistent with EU law is not due to the taxable person for the period after the expiry of 30 days from the date of publication in the Official Journal of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union declaring that the collection of the tax is incompatible with EU law, where the request for a declaration of that overpayment was submitted by the taxable person after that time limit and the provisions of national law relating to the collection of the tax continue to be incompatible with EU law despite the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 10 April 2014, [E. ... (C-190/12, EU:C:2014:249)]?

---
exh_1022.htm


Exhibit 10.22







FIRST AMENDMENT TO


HARVARD BIOSCIENCE, INC.


THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED 2000 STOCK OPTION AND INCENTIVE PLAN







This First Amendment to the Harvard Bioscience, Inc. Third Amended and Restated 2000 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is effective as of March 9, 2013 (the “Effective Date”).







Pursuant to the authorization of the Board of Directors of Harvard Bioscience, Inc. in accordance with Section 17 of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended as follows, effective as of the Effective Date:








	  	
1.

	
Clause (v) of Section 3(b) of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following in its stead:


 


“(v) the price for each share subject to any then outstanding Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights under the Plan, without changing the aggregate exercise price (i.e., the exercise price multiplied by the number of Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights) as to which such Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights remain exercisable in a manner that will trigger tax under Section 409A”













	  	
2.

	
Section 4 of the Plan is hereby amended by adding the following provisions to the end thereof:


 


“With respect to the Awards (“Adjustment Awards”) modified or issued in connection with any equitable adjustment by the Company, in accordance herewith and with the formulas and provisions set forth in the Separation and Distribution Agreement that may be entered into by and between the Company and Harvard Apparatus Regenerative Technology, Inc. (“HART”), of certain Awards previously granted by the Company, notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan or Award to the contrary, for purposes of exercisability, vesting and the post-termination exercise periods applicable to any Awards, continued employment with, or service to, the Company (or its subsidiaries) or HART (or its subsidiaries) is considered to be continued employment with, and service to, the other, provided that the failure to exercise Incentive Stock Options within the applicable deadline following any separation from service from the Company shall cause such options to be treated thereafter as Non-Qualified Stock Options.”













	  	
3.

	
The following is added to the end of the Plan:







 


“DATE FIRST AMENDMENT TO HARVARD BIOSCIENCE, INC. THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED 2000 STOCK OPTION AND INCENTIVE PLAN APPROVED BY BOARD OF DIRECTORS: MARCH 9, 2013.”








	  	
4.

	
Except as expressly amended hereby, the Plan shall remain in full force and effect.
No. 11-10137.

#### Palacios *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Due	to	the	large	size	of	the	manual	PDF	files	and	a	maximum	of	

10	megabyte	upload	limit	for	filing	a	petition,	the	documents	are	therefore	

available	online.	

Exhibit	B	

Any	other	information	regarding	the	DJI	Phantom	2	Vision	+	along	with	

manuals	can	be	obtained	from	the	link	below:

http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_2_vision_plus/en/Phantom_2_Visio

n_Plus_User_Manual_v1.8_en.pdf

http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-2-vision-plus/download

_____________________________________________________________

Exhibit	D

Any	other	information regarding	the	DJI	Phantom	3	Professional	along	with	

manuals	can	be	obtained	from	the	link	below.

http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_3/en/Phantom_3_Professional_Use

r_Manual_v1.2_en.pdf

http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-3/download
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 6 (Thursday, January 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 1314]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-609]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

DATE AND TIME: Friday, January 17, 1997, 9:30 a.m.

PLACE: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 624 Ninth Street, N.W., Room 
540, Washington, DC 20425.

STATUS:

Agenda
    I. Approval of Agenda
    II. Approval of Minutes of December 6, 1996 Meeting
    III. Announcements
    IV. Staff Director's Report
    V. Project Planning FY 1999
    VI. Future Agenda Items

CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Barbara Brooks, Press and 
Communications (202) 376-8312
Stephanie Y. Moore,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 97-609 Filed 1-7-97; 11:48 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-M
Water Quality Standards Regulatory Revisions Rulemaking

MEMORANDUM TO RECORD SUBJECT: Meeting with State-EPA Roundtable DATE: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 TIME: Noon – 1:30 PM Participants: EPA – Sara Hisel-McCoy, Shari Barash, Manjali Vlcan, Janita Aguirre, Christina Christensen, Heather Goss, Gary Russo, Rosaura Conde, Ruth Chemerys, David Hair, Glynis Hill, Ellen Weitzler, Wayne Jackson, Cheryl Atkinson, Lisa Perras-Gordon, David Pfeifer, Russell Nelson, Ann Lavaty, Phillip Woods ACWA/States – Gerry Szal (Massachusetts), Alex Barron (Virginia), Martha Clark Mettler (Indiana), Jason Childress (Oklahoma), Mike Tate (Kansas), Lindsay Patterson (Wyoming), Deb Smith (California), Nancy Sonafrank (Alaska), Cheryl Niemi (Washington), Susan Braley (Washington) Summary of Meeting: Participants discussed ACWA’s public comments related to the proposed rule’s economic analysis.

TOPIC TIME LEAD__________ 1. Roll Call 10 min Aguirre 2. Discussion of Economic Comments 60 min Roundtable 3. Questions & Answers 15 min Roundtable 4. Reminders for next Roundtable meeting 5 min Aguirre
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE FOR 1997

THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 9/30/97
RALSTON PURINA COMPANY BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF EARNINGS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             		     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                		   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         109,100
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  700,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    24,800
<INVENTORY>                                    604,800
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,505,500
<PP&E>                                       2,160,600
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,046,900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,741,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,215,800
<BONDS>                                      1,860,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          304,900
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,500
<OTHER-SE>                                     905,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,741,800
<SALES>                                      4,486,800
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,486,800
<CGS>                                        2,281,900
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,281,900
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,642,600
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,100
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             174,300
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                384,900
<INCOME-TAX>                                    70,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            348,900
<DISCONTINUED>                                  74,800
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   423,700
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.80
        


</TABLE>
#### IN RE: Michael WEST, Petitioner

No. 17-3002

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. November 30, 2017

(Opinion filed: March 2, 2018)

Michael West, Pro Se

David V. Bober, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Trenton, NJ, Mark E. Coyne, Esq., Caroline A. Sadlowski, Esq., Office of United States Attorney, Newark, NJ, for Defendants-Respondents

Before: MCKEE, VANASKIE, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges

OPINION *

PER CURIAM

Pro se petitioner Michael West is currently serving a sentence for distribution and possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)(A) and (a)(5)(B). In November 2016, West filed a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey challenging the Bureau of Prison’s calculation of his sentence. West later moved to amend his petition to add a claim that his convictions should be vacated because the district court that presided over the criminal matter lacked jurisdiction to convict him. While his motion to amend was pending, the Government submitted an answer to West’s § 2241 petition.

' West then filed this petition for a writ of mandamus alleging that the Government had failed to address his contention that the criminal court lacked jurisdiction to convict him. Shortly thereafter, the District Court denied West’s motion to amend his petition to include this claim, explaining that he may not challenge his conviction and sentence via § 2241. West’s habe-as petition remains pending in the District Court.

We will deny the petition.1 Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy that we grant only when the petitioner has a “clear and indisputable” right to relief and “no other adequate means” to obtain it. In re Briscoe, 448 F.3d 201, 212 (3d Cir. 2006); see also In re Kensington Int’l Ltd., 353 F.3d 211, 219 (3d Cir. 2003). West has not demonstrated that he has “no other adequate means” to obtain the requested relief, as he may object to any errors in his case on appeal from a final judgment.2

*197Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus will be denied.

*

 This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P, 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent,

1

. We have jurisdiction over this mandamus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651.

2

. We express no opinion on the merit of any claims raised in such appeal.