alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022294EN.01003401.xml

| 1.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 294/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/34

---

Action brought on 8 June 2022 — Deutsche Bank v EUIPO — Operación y Auditoria (avanza Tu negocio)

(Case T-341/22)

(2022/C 294/49)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Deutsche Bank, SA Española (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: I. Valdelomar Serrano, J. Rodriguez Fuensalida, P. Ramells Higueras and A. Figuerola Moure, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Operación y Auditoria, SA de CV, SOFOM, ENR (Mexico City, Mexico)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

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

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark avanza Tu negocio — Application for registration No 18 208 813

Proceedings before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 March 2022 in Case R 1808/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council was erroneously applied in the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council was erroneously applied in the contested decision;

| — | reject the protection in respect of all services sought in the application for registration of EU trade mark No 18 208 813 avanza Tu negocio (figurative) in Class 36; and |
| --- | --- |

—

reject the protection in respect of all services sought in the application for registration of EU trade mark No 18 208 813 avanza Tu negocio (figurative) in Class 36; and

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the representation costs, incurred by the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings, including the representation costs, incurred by the applicant.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
EXHIBIT
32




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002








In
connection with the quarterly report of ILX Resorts Incorporated (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the three months ending March 31, 2010, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I (We),
Joseph P. Martori, Chief Executive Officer, and Margaret M. Eardley, Chief
Financial 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:




(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/ Joseph P.
Martori


Joseph P.
Martori


Chief
Executive Officer


May 13,
2010






/s/ Margaret M.
Eardley


Margaret
M. Eardley


Chief
Financial Officer


May 13,
2010
# C_2022244EN.01003902.xml

| 27.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 244/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 244/39

---

Action brought on 27 April 2022 — Cylus Cyber Security v EUIPO — Cylance (CYLUS)

(Case T-227/22)

(2022/C 244/53)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Cylus Cyber Security Ltd (Tel Aviv, Israel) (represented by: S. Bailey, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Cylance, Inc. (Irvine, California, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark CYLUS — Application for registration No 17 801 952

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 February 2022 in Case R 692/2022-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
**Exhibit 32.01**

 

**OFFICER CERTIFICATION**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of PSCo on Form 10-K for the year 2004, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Form 10-K), each of the undersignedofficers of the PSCo certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to suchofficer’s knowledge:

 

(1)       The Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)       The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PSCo asof the dates and for the periods expressed in the Form 10-K.

 

Date:March 3, 2005

 
|   | /s/ WAYNE H. BRUNETTI                       |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Wayne H. Brunetti                           |
|   | Chairman and Chief  Executive Officer       |
|   |
|   | /s/ BENJAMIN  G.S. FOWKE III                |   |
|   | Benjamin  G.S. Fowke III                    |
|   | Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

The foregoing certificationis being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not beingfiled as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement required by Section906, has been provided to PSCo and will be retained by PSCo and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8645 

To designate the Kissimmee Gateway Airport and certain surrounding areas 

as an enterprise community. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 20, 2020 

Mr. SOTO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To designate the Kissimmee Gateway Airport and certain 

surrounding areas as an enterprise community. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF THE KISSIMMEE GATEWAY 

4 AIRPORT AREA AS AN ENTERPRISE COMMU5 NITY. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of subchapter U of 

7 chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the Kis8 simmee Gateway Airport area shall be treated as an enter9 prise community designated as such under section 1391 

10 of such Code on the date of the enactment of this Act. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8645 IH

1 (b) COORDINATION WITH LIMITATIONS ON OTHER

2 ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES.—The enterprise community 

3 referred to in subsection (a) shall not be taken into ac4 count for purposes of applying any limitation on the enter5 prise communities which may otherwise be designated 

6 under section 1391 of such Code. 

7 (c) KISSIMMEE GATEWAY AIRPORT AREA.—For pur8 poses of this section, the ‘‘Kissimmee Gateway Airport 

9 area’’ means the area surrounding the Kissimmee Gate10 way Airport in Kissimmee, Florida, bound as follows (and 

11 determined as of the date of the enactment of this Act): 

12 beginning at the intersection of U.S. Highway 192 and 

13 North Thacker Avenue, south along North Thacker Ave14 nue to South Thacker Avenue, then south along South 

15 Thacker Avenue to the intersection of South Thacker Ave16 nue and Clay Street, then southwest along Clay Street to 

17 Pug Mill Road, then southwest along Pug Mill Road to 

18 the intersection of Pug Mill Road and South Hoagland 

19 Boulevard, then southeast along South Hoagland Boule20 vard to the intersection of South Hoagland Boulevard and 

21 Old Tampa Highway, then southwest along Old Tampa 

22 Highway to the intersection of Old Tampa Highway and 

23 Shingle Creek, then northerly along Shingle Creek to the 

24 intersection of Shingle Creek and U.S. Highway 192, then 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8645 IH

1 east along U.S. Highway 192 to the intersection of U.S. 

2 Highway 192 and North Thacker Avenue. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
No. 11-11014.

#### Edmond *v.*Mississippi.

Sup. Ct. Miss. Cer-tiorari denied.
#### UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Sean Tyree LEWIS Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-2136

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: March 1, 2018

Filed: March 9, 2018

Amy L. Jennings, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Sean Tyree Lewis, Pro Se

Before GRUENDER, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Sean Lewis directly appeals the district court’s1 judgment entered after he pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute a heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and 846, and to being a felon in possession of firearms and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and *611924(a)(2). Following careful review of the arguments raised in the brief filed by Lewis's counsel pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), we conclude (1) the district court’s findings with regard to the drug-quantity attribution and application of the aggravating-role, vulnerable-individual, and obstruction-of-justice adjustments were supported by the testimony at the sentencing hearing and were not clearly erroneous; (2) the determination that Lewis was a career offender did not affect his sentence; and (3) his sentence was not substantively unreasonable. Turning to Lewis’s pro se arguments, we find no error, plain or otherwise, with regard to application of the sentencing enhancement for his possession of a firearm, and no breach of the plea agreement by the government. Finally, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no non-frivolous issues for appeal. The judgment of the district court is affirmed,2 and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

1

. The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.

2

. We have assumed without deciding that, under the circumstances of this appeal, the arguments are not precluded by the appeal waiver. See United States v. Valencia, 829 F.3d 1007, 1012 (8th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 137 S.Ct. 838, 197 L.Ed.2d 76 (2017).
# C_2022148EN.01004202.xml

| 4.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/42

---

Action brought on 21 February 2022 — Amisi Kumba v Council

(Case T-92/22)

(2022/C 148/56)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Gabriel Amisi Kumba (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, A. Guillerme and T. Payan, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should

| — | annul Council decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 (1) in so far as the applicant remains at No 2 in the annex to that decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 (1) in so far as the applicant remains at No 2 in the annex to that decision;

| — | annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2177 of 9 December 2021 (2) in so far as the applicant remains at No 2 in Annex I to that regulation; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2177 of 9 December 2021 (2) in so far as the applicant remains at No 2 in Annex I to that regulation;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law, which are, in essence, identical or similar to those relied on in Case T-90/22, Kande Mupompa v Council.

---

(1)  Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021, amending decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 75).

(2)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2181 of 9 December 2021 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of Congo (OJ 2021 L 443, p. 3).

---
No. 11-10686.

#### Matthews *v.*Pennsylvania.

Super. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-10916.

#### Snyder *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 22

- 00377

- CR

Jose Andres ROMERO

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court

, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 7292

Honorable Albert D. Pattillo, III , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE WATKINS

, JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ , AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

SIGNED October 19, 2022.

_________________________________ Beth Watkins , Justice
# C_2022451EN.01002102.xml

| 28.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 451/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 451/21

---

Action brought on 12 October 2022 — U. I. Lapp v EUIPO — Labkable Asia (Labkable Solutions for cables)

(Case T-636/22)

(2022/C 451/26)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: U. I. Lapp GmbH (Stuttgart, Germany) (represented by: R. Ingerl and M. Ringer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Labkable Asia Ltd (Kowloon, Hong Kong, China)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

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

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark Labkable Solutions for cables — Application for registration No 18 123 696

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 July 2022 in Case R 1894/2021-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | alter the contested decision so that the appeal filed by the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal is dismissed; |
| --- | --- |

—

alter the contested decision so that the appeal filed by the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal is dismissed;

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

—

alternatively, annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs incurred by the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs incurred by the applicant.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 94(1), first sentence of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 94(1), first sentence of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                                 PUBLICARD, INC.
                            AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report dated March 20, 2002 included in this Form 10-K into
the Company's previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-3 File Nos.
33-9344, 333-80447, 333-87597, 333-89917, 333-33788 and 333-53204 and
Registration Statements on Form S-8 File Nos. 33-88876, 333-72411, 333-43466
and 333-43468.


/s/Arthur Andersen LLP

Stamford, Connecticut
March 25, 2002
No. D-2681.

#### In re Discipline of Hennessey.

James J. Hennessey, Jr., of Albany, N. Y., is suspended from the practice of law in this Court, and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed March 16, 2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-20-00217-CR

WALTER PENDLETON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Waller County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC18-624

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The record reflects this is an attempted appeal from a judgment where the 

fine imposed does not exceed $100, exclusive of costs. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. 

art. 4.03. Appellant does not challenge the constitutionality of the statute or 

ordinance on which the conviction was based. Id.; see also Alexander v. State, 240 

S.W.3d 72, 75 (Tex. App.—Austin 2007, no pet.) (citing Ex parte Brand, 822

S.W.2d 636, 638 n. 3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992)).
2

On February 10, 2021, this court notified the parties that the appeal would be 

dismissed for lack of jurisdiction unless a party demonstrated that the court has 

jurisdiction. No response has been received. 

We dismiss the appeal. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Zimmerer, and Poissant.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 49 (Thursday, March 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 11951]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6402]


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


DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Agency Information Collection: Submission for OMB Review; Comment 
Request

AGENCY: Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans 
Affairs.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), Department of 
Veterans Affairs, has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) the following proposal for the collection of information under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    OMB Control Number: 2900-0215.
    Title and Form Number: Request for Information to Make Direct 
Payment to Child Reaching Majority, VA Form Letter 21-863.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Need and Uses: The form letter is used to gather the necessary 
information to determine the address of a child attaining majority and 
to determine the child's student status. The information is needed to 
pay a child directly when the child attains majority. VA procedures 
provide that a competent child who is entitled to benefits in his or 
her own right should be paid directly upon attaining majority.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 3,767 hours.
    Estimated Average Burden Per Respondent: 10 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: Generally one-time.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 22,600.

ADDRESSES: A copy of this submission may be obtained from Ron Taylor, 
Information Management Service (045A4), Department of Veterans Affairs, 
8l0 Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20420, (202) 273-8015.
    Comments and recommendations concerning this submission should be 
directed to VA's OMB Desk Officer, Allison Eydt, OMB Human Resources 
and Housing Branch, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 
Washington, DC 20503 (202) 395-4650. Do not send requests for benefits 
to this address.

DATES: Comments on the information collection should be directed to the 
OMB Desk Officer on or before April 14, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Ron Taylor, Information Management 
Service (045A4), (202) 273-8015.

    Dated: February 18, 1997.

    By direction of the Secretary.
Donald L. Neilson,
Director, Information Management Service
[FR Doc. 97-6402 Filed 3-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 49 (Thursday, March 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 11952]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6300]


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


DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Advisory Committee on Cemeteries and Memorials, Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice that a meeting 
of the Advisory Committee on Cemeteries and Memorials, authorized by 38 
U.S.C. 2401, will be held at Arlington National Cemetery, Arlington, 
VA. This will be the committee's second meeting of fiscal year 1997. 
The purpose of the committee is to review the administration of VA's 
cemeteries and burial benefits program. On April 10, 1997, the meeting 
will convene at 8:15 a.m. (EST) and will adjourn at 4 p.m. (EST). On 
April 11, 1997, the meeting will convene at 8 a.m. (EST) and will 
adjourn at 2:30 p.m. (EST).
    On April 10, there will be a business session and briefings that 
will primarily address issues concerning the mission and activities of 
Arlington National Cemetery, American Battle Monuments Commission, and 
National Park Service.
    On April 11, the committee will be briefed on Field Operations and 
Operations Support Service. Suggestions for the next meeting location 
and agenda items will also be discussed.
    The meeting will be open to the public. Those wishing to attend 
should contact Ms. Rebecca Schiller, Program Specialist, National 
Cemetery System, [phone (202) 273-5180] not later than 12 noon (EST), 
March 24, 1997.
    Any interested person may attend, appear before, or file a 
statement with the Committee. Individuals wishing to appear before the 
Committee should indicate this in a letter to the Director, National 
Cemetery System (40) at 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420. 
In any such letters, the writers must fully identify themselves and 
state the organization, association or person they represent. Also, to 
the extent practicable, letters should indicate the subject matter they 
want to discuss. Oral presentations should be limited to 10 minutes in 
duration. Those wishing to file written statements to be submitted to 
the Committee must also mail, or otherwise deliver, them to the 
Director, National Cemetery System.
    Letters and written statements as discussed above must be mailed or 
delivered in time to reach the Director, National Cemetery System, by 
12 noon (EST), March 24, 1997. Oral statements will be heard only 
between 1 p.m. and 2:30 p.m. (EST), April 11 at Arlington National 
Cemetery, Arlington, VA.

    Dated: March 6, 1997.

    By direction of the Secretary.
Heyward Bannister,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-6300 Filed 3-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M