alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Denis RIVERA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Harold Clarke; David Robinson; G. K. Washington; Randall Mathena; Gregory Holloway; Scott Richeson; Malcolm Taylor; Keith *223Dawkins; Dr. Brane; Jim Parks; Henry Ponton; Earl Barksdale; George Hinkle; Elizabeth Thornton; J. Walrath; I. Hamilton; T. Puryear; J. Artrip; A. Gallihar; G. Baker; Michael Younce; Walter Swiney; Tori Raiford; Dwayne Turner; Stacy Day; Christopher Gilbert; Joe Fannin; Tony Adams; G. A. Adams; K. A. Sykes; R. Kegley; B. E. Stallard; Jackson; J. King, former counselor at Red Onion State Prison; A. B. Duncan, Unit Manager, Defendants-Appellees, and External Review Team; Dual Treatment Team; Unit Manager Team, Defendants.

No. 17-6293

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 31, 2018

Decided: March 1, 2018

Denis Rivera, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Parsons, Assistant Attorney General, Richard Carson Vorhis, Senior Assistant Attorney General, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Before DUNCAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Denis Rivera appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Rivera’s motion to appoint counsel and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Rivera v. Va. Dep’t. of Corr.,*No. 7:15-cv-00156-JPJ-RSB (W.D. Va. Dec. 8, 2016 & Feb. 3, 2017). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
# C_2023223EN.01002802.xml

| 26.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/28

---

Order of the General Court of 4 May 2023 — Amazonen-Werke H. Dreyer v EUIPO — (Combination of the colours green and orange)

(Case T-618/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - International registration designating the European Union - Mark consisting in a combination of the colours green and orange - 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 223/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Amazonen-Werke H. Dreyer SE & Co. KG (Hasbergen-Gaste, Germany) (represented by: C. Neuhierl, lawyer)

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

Re:

By its action based on 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 22 July 2022 (Case R 2006/2021-5).

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Each party shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Each party shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 441, 21.11.2022.

---
# Certification of the
Chief Executive Officer and Vice President  Finance

Solely for the purpose of complying
with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, we, the undersigned Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Vice President 
Finance of Northland Cranberries, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, based on
our knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months
ended May 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

|/s/ John Swendrowski | /s/ Nigel J. Cooper
|-------------------- | -------------------
|John Swendrowski     | Nigel J. Cooper    
|July 15, 2004        | July 15, 2004
# C_2023278EN.01002202.xml

| 7.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/22

---

Order of the General Court of 20 June 2023 — NO v Commission

(Case T-771/22) (1)

(Action for annulment - State aid - Irish legal sector - Payment of the fees of a client’s former solicitor by that client’s new solicitor - Rejection of a complaint - Decision finding that there is no State aid - State resources - Manifest inadmissibility in part - Action in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2023/C 278/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: NO (represented by: E. Smartt, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Commission, (represented by: I. Barcew and L. Nicolae, acting as Agents)

Re:

By his action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant asks the General Court to annul the decision of the European Commission of 27 September 2022 rejecting his complaint of 12 September 2022.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded.

| 2. | NO is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

NO is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 104, 20.3.2023.

---
No. 11-10620.

#### Hassett *v.*Hasselbeck et al.

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
SunChemicar**<''·~·('F' ~**  \l[;•c•)**~L**....,.,.....**~w** L amemberoftheOICgroup Eft Oop·l·· cr!'j0 1 !.) \1 Sun Chemical Corporation 1506 Bushy Park Road Goose Creek, SC 29445

(843) 820-6102 ' 2014 Ht\R 19 Mi8:29 (843) 820-6836 Fax robert.mott@sunchemical.com February 4, 2014 II Scanned & Processed in CIS by: SHARON Document Control Office (DCO) (7407M) Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20460-0001

Re: 40 CFR 799.5089- Test Rule Exemption Request Docket ID Number- EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0112 Sun Chemical Corporation- CAS 127-68-4 Dear Sir/madam,

CBIC Control Number359036 <'r"'I- )'(.V!f**~)**?-7 This serves asan Application for Exemption, in Compliance40 CFR 790-82. We last imported this material in 2011 and this was always a minor portion of our supply chain for this chemical substance. Basis for Exemption: The tests required under the test rule have been completed by Tiarco Chemical.

We have entered ari agreement with Tiarco Chemical whereby they have agreed to cover our obligation under their test plan as required under 40 CFR 790.99 forafair and equitable reimbursement on our part. Therefore, pursuant to the requirements under 40 CFR 790.45 weare providing the following required information: Chemical Name: Benzenesulfonic acid, 3-nitro-, sodium salt (1:1) CAS Number: 127-68-4 Molecular formula: C6HsNOsS.Na Chemical Purity:**~99%** Verification of Identity: Method 2 - supplier information; verified through internal chemical characterizationImpurities known tobe present:**~1** %, Water, CAS 7732-18-5 Known Trade Names: Ludigol, Reservol, Resist Salt Testing Requirements: The tests covered by the test plan from Tiarco Chemical are: A3. Vapor Pressure: ASTM E 1782-08 (thermal analysis); F2. Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test: 40 CPR 799.9355.

Company Sponsoring:Sun Chemical Corporation 35 Waterview Boulevard Parsippany, NJ 07054-1285 United States of America 973 404 6000 Tel 973 404 6001 Fax
RECEN£0[l.??-l5 ?.0\4 E.PA oocKET CENTERSun Chemical® a membe):ofthe DICgroup Flffl Company Contact:Dr. Robert C. Mott 1506 Bushy park Rd. Goose Creek, SC 29445 843 820-6102 Tel 843 820-6836 Fax

Sun Chemical Corporation 1506 Bushy Park Road Goose Creel{, SC 29445

(843) 820-6102 (843) 820-.6836 Fax robert.mott@sunchemical.com Please do not hesitate to contact me shouid you require any further assistance. Sincerely,**~~~**Dr. Robert C. Mott Manager, Global Regulatory
### Facilities that Utilize Both SNCR and Mercury Contr ol

Plant Name Unit ID State Name Modeled Fuels Capacity (MW) Edge Moor 3 Delaware Bituminous 86.0 Edge Moor 4 Delaware Bituminous 174 Indian River Generating Station 4 Delaware Bitumino us 405 Indian River Generating Station 3 Delaware Bituminous, Subbituminous 153 Vermilion 1 Illinois Subbituminous 84.0 Herbert A Wagner 2 Maryland Subbituminous 135 Salem Harbor 1 Massachusetts Bituminous 82.0 Salem Harbor 3 Massachusetts Bituminous 150 Salem Harbor 2 Massachusetts Bituminous 80.0 B L England 2 New Jersey Bituminous, Subbituminous 155 C R Huntley Generating Station 68 New York Bituminous, Subbituminous 190 C R Huntley Generating Station 67 New York Bituminous, Subbituminous 190 Dunkirk Generating Station 3 New York Bituminous, Subbituminous 185 Dunkirk Generating Station 1 New York Bituminous, Subbituminous 75.0 Taconite Harbor Energy Center 3 Minnesota Subbitumin ous 68.0 Taconite Harbor Energy Center 2 Minnesota Subbitumin ous 67.0 Taconite Harbor Energy Center 1 Minnesota Subbitumin ous 65.0 Source: NEEDS v4.10 July 6, 2012
# C_2023179EN.01000801.xml

| 22.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 30 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad — Bulgaria) — IP, DD, ZI, SS, HYA

(Case C-269/22, (1) IP and Others (Establishment of the accuracy of the facts in the main proceedings — II))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 267 TFEU - The second paragraph of Article 47 and Article 48(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right to a fair trial - Right to the presumption of innocence - Account of the factual context in a request for a preliminary ruling in criminal matters - Establishment of the accuracy of certain facts in order to be able to make an admissible request for a preliminary ruling to the Court - Compliance with the procedural safeguards provided for under national law for judgments on the merits)

(2023/C 179/10)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: IP, DD, ZI, SS, HYA

Other party to the proceedings: Spetsializirana prokuratura

Operative part of the judgment

Article 267 TFEU, read in the light of the second paragraph of Article 47 and of Article 48(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

must be interpreted as not precluding a national court or tribunal in criminal matters, before any judgment on the merits, from establishing, with due regard for the procedural safeguards provided for by national law, the accuracy of certain facts in order to be able to make an admissible request for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice.

---

(1)  OJ C 303, 8.8.2022.

---
No. 11-10614.

#### Brewer *v.*United States.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 32.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350*


In connection with the Annual Report of PGI Incorporated (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Laurence A. Schiffer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:


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

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



/s/ Laurence A. Schiffer
---------------------------------------------------------
    Laurence A. Schiffer
    Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)      March 31, 2008


<FN>
*A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company
 and will be retained by the Company and will be furnished to the Securities
 and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>   1



                                   EXHIBIT 23
                                      

                        [ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP LETTERHEAD]



                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



To Ramapo Financial Corporation:

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference in this Form 10-K of our report dated January 17, 1996 and to all
references to our Firm. It should be noted that we have not audited any
financial statements of Ramapo Financial Corporation subsequent to December 31,
1995 or performed any audit procedures subsequent to the date of our report.


                                /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP
                                ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Roseland, New Jersey
March 22, 1996
Exhibit 10.2


 





March 25 2014


TCA Global Credit Master Fund, LP


1404 Rodman Street


Hollywood,
Florida 33020





     



Attention: Robert Press, Director


 


	Re:	Committed Equity Facility Agreement and Registration Rights Agreement dated as of May 31, 2012 of Mobiquity Technologies, Inc.,
formerly Ace Marketing & Promotions, Inc.



 


Gentlemen:


 


By each of our signatures
below, we mutually agree to immediately terminate without liability or further obligation to the other, the Committed Equity Facility
Agreement and Registration Rights Agreement dated as of May 31, 2012 of Mobiquity Technologies, Inc., formerly Ace Marketing &
Promotions, Inc. It is further agreed that Mobiquity will remove from registration all unsold shares of Common Stock which were
registered for sale pursuant to an effective registration of April 12, 2013. Also, TCA Global Credit Master Fund, LP will undertake
to return to Mobiquity for cancellation 42,000 shares of Common Stock of Mobiquity which are at Caledonian and have not been paid
for or sold by Caledonian.


 


COMPANY:


 


  MOBIQUITY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.




  formerly ACE MARKETING & PROMOTIONS, INC.




 


By: /s/ Dean
Julia


Name: Dean Julia


Title: Co-CEO


 


INVESTOR:


 


  TCA GLOBAL CREDIT MASTER FUND, LP




 


By: TCA
Global Credit Fund GP, Ltd., its general partner


 


By: /s/ Robert
Press


Name: Robert Press


Title: Director


 


 


 





 



600 Old Country Road, Suite 541, Garden City, NY 11530
### -82 -80 -78 -76 -74

36 38 40 

## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 06/25 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 25 Jun 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 39.41 N 77.38 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■
■ ■



## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ●

●
● 

## ★ ● ● ● ●
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
 
                              DRYPERS CORPORATION
 
             STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                       (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE DATA)
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                               MARCH 31,
                                                          ---------------------
                                                            1996        1997
                                                          ---------  ----------
<S>                                                       <C>        <C>
Net Income (Loss)........................................ $  (2,915) $    1,973
Preferred Stock Dividend.................................        55         168
                                                          ---------  ----------
Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Common Stockholders.... $  (2,970) $    1,805
                                                          =========  ==========
Weighted Average Number of Shares of Common Stock........ 6,621,353   7,837,778
Common Stock Equivalents.................................        --  10,768,290
                                                          ---------  ----------
Weighted Average Number of Shares of Common Stock and
 Common Stock Equivalents................................ 6,621,533  18,606,068
                                                          =========  ==========
Net Income (Loss) Per Share of Common Stock and Common
 Stock Equivalents....................................... $    (.45) $      .11
                                                          =========  ==========
</TABLE>
# C_2022165EN.01004001.xml

| 19.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/40

---

Action brought on 22 February 2022 — Transgourmet Ibérica v EUIPO — Aldi (Gourmet)

(Case T-102/22)

(2022/C 165/48)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Transgourmet Ibérica, SAU (Gerona, Spain) (represented by: C. Duch Fonoll and I. Osinaga Lozano, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Aldi GmbH & Co. KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark Gourmet — European Union trade mark No 8 143 653

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 December 2021 in Case R 862/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in its entirety; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in its entirety;

| — | remit the case back to the Board of Appeal to give final judgment and |
| --- | --- |

—

remit the case back to the Board of Appeal to give final judgment and

| — | order the EUIPO and the intervener to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the appellant in the present proceedings and in the appeal and first instance proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EUIPO and the intervener to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the appellant in the present proceedings and in the appeal and first instance proceedings.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council and the case-law related; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council and the case-law related;

| — | Infringement of Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, read in conjunction with Article 10(4) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 and case-law related; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, read in conjunction with Article 10(4) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 and case-law related;

| — | Infringement of Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, read in conjunction with Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 64(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council, read in conjunction with Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
#### COM. v. BOCCALUPO, J.

1846 EDA 2015

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/25/2017

CP-51-CR-0006814-2014 (Philadelphia)

Affirmed
# Section 504

- U.S. Department of Education Announces Intent to Strengthen and Protect Rights for Students with Disabilities by Amending Regulations Implementing Section 504 Forty-five years after publication of the regulations implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the landmark disability civil rights law, the U.S. Department of Education announced plans to gather public input on possible amendments to those regulations in order to strengthen and protect the rights of students with disabilities.
#### Michael E. BOYD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-15641

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 13, 2018 *

Filed February 23, 2018

Michael E. Boyd, Pro Se

Claire Truxaw Cormier, Esquire, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ—Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Jose, CA, for Defendants-Appellees United States Department of the Treasury, Jack Lew, United States of America

David William Tyra, James W. Ward, Attorney, Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann *&*Girard PC, Sacramento, CA, for Defen*649dants-Appellees Jerry Brown, Michael Cohen

Thomas J. Umberg, Attorney, Umberg Zipser LLP, Irvine, CA, for Defendant-Appellee Betty Yee

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2),

MEMORANDUM **

Michael E. Boyd appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo questions of constitutional standing. *Wash. Envtl. Council v. Bellon,*732 F.3d 1131, 1138 (9th Cir. 2013). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. *Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP,*534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.

Dismissal of Boyd’s action was proper because Boyd failed to allege facts showing that defendants caused Boyd any cognizable injury as required for Article III standing. *See Lujan v.*Defs. *of Wildlife,*504 U.S. 555, 560-61, 112 S.Ct. 2130, 119 L.Ed.2d 351 (1992) (elements of Article III standing); *see also Wash. Envtl. Council,*732 F.3d at 1139 (“We also have an independent duty to assure that standing exists, irrespective of whether the parties challenge it.”).

We do not consider issues or arguments not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n,2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

**

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.