alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014431EN.01002201.xml

| 1.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 431/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 431/22

---

Order of the General Court of 2 October 2014 — HTC Sweden v OHIM — Vermop Salmon (TWISTER)

(Case T-230/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Withdrawal of application for declaration of invalidity - No need to adjudicate))

(2014/C 431/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: HTC Sweden AB (Söderköping, Sweden) (represented by: G. Hasselblatt and D. Kipping, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: Vermop Salmon GmbH (Gilching, Germany) (represented by: M. Ring and W. von der Osten-Sacken, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 31 January 2013 (joined cases R 1873/2011-1 and R 1881/2011-1) relating to invalidity proceedings between Vermop Salmon GmbH and HTC Sweden AB.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of those incurred by the defendant. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant and the intervener shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of those incurred by the defendant.

---

(1)  OJ C 178, 22.6.2013.

1

---
No. 09-10182.

#### Rudy Stanko, Petitioner v. Herman Quay, et al.

562 U.S. 844, 131 S. Ct. 76,

178 L. Ed. 2d 52,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5834.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 356 Fed. Appx. 208.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 15 (Friday, January 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 3535]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1666]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Rhode Island Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Rhode Island Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 
9:00 a.m. and adjourn at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, February 9, 1998, at the 
Providence Public Library, North Meeting Room, 225 Washington Street, 
Providence, Rhode Island 02903. The purpose of the meeting is to hold a 
consultation to gather information for its project, ``An Examination of 
the Impact of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
Reconciliation Act of 1996 on Legal Immigrants in Rhode Island.'' The 
Committee has invited community representatives and immigrant rights 
organizations, State and local officials, and the State congressional 
delegation to brief the Committee on this topic.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact Committee Chairperson Robert Lee, 401-
863-1693, or Ki-Taek Chun, Director of the Eastern Regional Office, 
202-376-7533 (TDD 202-376-8116). Hearing-impaired persons who will 
attend the meeting and require the services of a sign language 
interpreter should contact the Regional Office at least ten (10) 
working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, January 16, 1998.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 98-1666 Filed 1-21-98; 10:21 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
# Disasters are unpredictable; be prepared

/ Published Sept. 22, 2016
Richmond, Va., 
We all know we can’t predict when a natural disaster will occur. We also can’t predict when man-made events such as an active shooter will take place. However, we can plan and prepare to respond to these types of events. We are continuously confronted with an ever changing landscape of disasters. Just in the past few years, we’ve had examples from hurricanes, severe changes in weather and now increases in mass shooter events. 

We, as an installation, are at the core for reducing risks by focusing on the creation of plans and actions to better prepare ourselves in the event of a natural disaster or man-made emergency, both on and off the installation. Remember, it is not just emergency response personnel who play a role in these types of events; we all play a role as individuals in risk reduction by having a plan and being prepared.       

September is National Preparedness Month and the goal is to increase public awareness to the importance of being prepared for these types of events.

Defense Logistics Agency Installation Support at Richmond’s Richmond Fire and Emergency Services would like to re-enforce the employees’ awareness of being prepared through the use of five key points stressed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency:

     1.   Make a plan. Where do we meet if an event occurs, how do we communicate if separated, and where is our local shelter if evacuated and how will we get there?

     2.  Make an emergency kit. Have items to get you through three days; food and water, clothing, blankets, flashlights, a radio, etc.

     3.  Stay informed. Keep up with the event by watching the television news casts, and listening to the radio for updates from local agencies and authorities.

     4.  Prepare your workplace. Treat just as you would your home. Know where to shelter and where to evacuate to, and listen to updates via Mass Notification, Giant Voice, Ad-Hoc systems, etc.     5. Take action and get involved. Don’t just say you are going to get to it, actually make the leap, and do it. Practice with your family and co-workers, get with neighbors and see what they are doing to prepare and assist them if they are not. Volunteer, there are plenty of agencies out there that can use your help to assist those in need.   

We must continue to take a proactive approach to being prepared. Make a plan, build your kit, practice, and most of all, get involved. It may be the difference in getting you out of harm’s way before the event or assisting you in getting through the event.
**Exhibit32.1**

**Certification of PrincipalExecutive OfficerRequired by Rule 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b)of the Exchange Act**

In connection with the QuarterlyReport of Advanstar, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three and sixmonths ended June 30, 2006  as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Joseph Loggia, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to the best of my knowledge:

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

(2)             The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result ofoperations of the Company.
| By:    | /s/  Joseph Loggia |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Joseph Loggia           |   |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |   |
|   |                    |   |
|   |                    |   |
|   | Date: August  14, 2006  |   |

 

----
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 3, 2021

No. 04-20-00392-CV

Sherry CAGLE n/k/a Sherry Schwartz,

Appellant

v.

Mario CUELLAR, Norma Cuellar, James Donald Cagle, and Hannah Funding LLC.,

Appellees

From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-CI-01910

Honorable Laura Salinas, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant’s reply brief is currently due June 7, 2021. On June 3, 2021, appellant 

filed an unopposed motion requesting an extension of time to file her reply brief until 

June 21, 2021. After consideration, appellant’s motion is GRANTED. We ORDER

appellant to file her reply brief by June 21, 2021.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 3rd day of June, 2021.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 10.3


 


August 9, 2004


 


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) made effective as
of August 9, 2004, between Datameg Corp., a New York corporation (the “Company”),
and Mark McGrath (“Consultant”).


 


WHEREAS, Consultant possesses knowledge and skills
that can be beneficial to Company; and


 


WHEREAS, the President of the Company (the “President”)
recognizes that the Consultant’s contribution to the growth and success of the
Company can be substantial


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual
covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties agree as follows:


 


1. Employment. The Company shall employ Consultant and
Consultant shall serve the Company, on the terms and conditions set forth
herein, for the period commencing on the date hereof.  Thereafter, the term of this Agreement may be
extended and renewed on an annual basis for additional periods of one-year each
upon written agreement of the parties made at least 30 days prior to the
expiration of the initial term or the then current renewal term, as the case
may be. The term of this Agreement, as it may from time to time be extended in
accordance with this Paragraph, may be referred to herein as the “Period of
Employment.”


 


2. Position and Duties. Consultant shall perform the
functions and duties as shall be reasonably prescribed from time to time by the
President provided that such functions and duties are consistent with and
attendant to Consultant’s position or other positions that he may hold from
time to time. Consultant shall devote all of his working time and efforts to
the business and affairs of the Company and the promotion of its interests and
perform all duties and services on behalf of the Company necessary to carry out
such functions.


 


3. Compensation and Related Matters.


 


(a) Base Salary. Consultant shall receive a weekly
salary at the rate of $2403.85, the weekly equivalent of $125,000.00 per annum.


 


(b) Expenses. Consultant shall be entitled to receive
prompt reimbursement for all reasonable expenses incurred by him during any
Period of Employment (in accordance with the policies and procedures then in
effect and established by the Company for its senior consultant officers) in
performing services hereunder, provided that Consultant properly accounts
therefore in accordance with Company policy.


 


(c) Other Benefits. 
Consultant acknowledges that Company currently does not have a benefit
plan other than such benefits expressly contained in this Agreement.  At such time as Company may make such
benefits available, Company agrees to extend to


 





















 


Consultant those Benefits generally made available to employees at a
similar level and cost as made available to employees generally.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this
Agreement effective on the date and year written above.


 


	
   

  	
  Datameg Corp..

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Mark P. McGrath, Consultant

  	
  Andrew Benson, President

  
					



 


2
# C_2015398EN.01003501.xml

| 30.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 October 2015 — Panrico v OHIM — HDN Development (Krispy Kreme DOUGHNUTS)

(Case T-534/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community figurative mark Krispy Kreme DOUGHNUTS - Earlier national and international word and figurative marks DONUT, DOGHNUTS, donuts and donuts cream - Relative ground of refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Likelihood of profit derived unduly from the distinctive character or reputation - Risk of detriment - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009)))

(2015/C 398/45)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Panrico SA (Esplugues de Llobregat, Spain) (represented by: D. Pellisé Urquiza, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: HDN Development Corp. (Frankfort, Kentucky, United States) (represented by: H. Granado Carpenter and M. Polo Carreňo, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 July 2013 (Case R 623/2011-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Panrico SA and HDN Development Corp.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders Panrico SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Panrico SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 9, 11.1.2014.

1

---
# Employee Spotlight: Kevin Gutierrez

/ Published Dec. 6, 2022
RICHMOND, Va., 
Name: Kevin Gutierrez

Organization: DLA Aviation at Ogden

How long have you worked for DLA: 7 years

What is your job title, and what do you do, specifically? I am a sustainment specialist. The main function of a sustainment specialist is to perform the creation and maintenance of the supportability action plan for all national item identification numbers we monitor. In a nutshell, an action plan lists the current supportability, or “health” of the NIIN and all the actions we are taking to make the NIIN supportable for the projected demand provided to us by the Air Force. 

What do you like most about your job? The thing I like most about my job is the analytical work involved in bringing each individual NIIN healthy. Because no two NIINs are alike, we as sustainment specialists are forced to look at each action plan similar to how one might look at a puzzle. This allows me to constantly use all of the tools at my disposal while at the same time forcing me to grow as each new NIIN brings with it its own individual challenge. It also gives me the opportunity to reach out to other agencies, both internal and external, to work collaboratively in getting the parts the Air Force needs.  

What aspect(s) of your current job gives you the most personal satisfaction and why? The most personal satisfaction I get from my job is the sense of accomplishment you get each time you can mark off a NIIN as healthy. It’s nice to be able to look over a completed action plan and see a chronological list of every action taken, every email sent and see that this item is good for the next 24 months. In a lot of positions, your day-to-day operations can become routine and mundane, but I don’t get that feeling in this position. Every NIIN I can manage to get supportable is one less thing the Air Force maintainers have to worry about.

If you could speak directly to the warfighters you support, what would you tell them? I would tell them to take care of your equipment because replacement parts can be hard to find.

What advice would you have given yourself 10 years ago?  A decade ago, I would’ve told myself to buy Bitcoin and lay off the cheeseburgers.

Where do you see yourself five years from now?  Still here with DLA. I have no intentions of leaving anytime soon.

What are some of your passions outside of work? I like playing board games. Every year my wife and I go to a convention where we get to play games with hundreds of other people for four days straight. I also play a lot of wargames and video games. 

What is your favorite military aircraft and why? When I was a kid, I remember going to an air show and got a chance to see the Air Force SR-71 Blackbird strategic reconnaissance plane and I remember thinking that it was the coolest plane I had ever seen. So, I would have to say that is my favorite aircraft, even though it has been retired for decades.

What is your proudest accomplishment? My three awesome kids. I have two daughters, 13 and 11. My son is nine. They are amazing and I couldn’t be prouder of them.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2621 

To direct the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis of the Department 

of Homeland Security to develop and disseminate a threat assessment 

regarding terrorist use of ghost guns, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2019 

Mr. ROSE of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To direct the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis 

of the Department of Homeland Security to develop and 

disseminate a threat assessment regarding terrorist use 

of ghost guns, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Homeland Security 

5 Assessment of Terrorists Use of Ghost Guns Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2621 IH

1 SEC. 2. THREAT ASSESSMENT ON TERRORIST USE OF 

2 GHOST GUNS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Under Secretary for Intel4 ligence and Analysis of the Department of Homeland Se5 curity shall, in coordination with appropriate Federal 

6 partners, annually develop and disseminate a terrorism 

7 threat assessment regarding the availability of ghost guns 

8 in furtherance of an act of terrorism, including the provi9 sion of material support or resources to a foreign terrorist 

10 organization. Consistent with the protection of classified 

11 and confidential unclassified information, the Under Sec12 retary shall share the threat assessment developed under 

13 this section with State, local, and Tribal law enforcement 

14 officials, including officials who operate within State, local, 

15 and regional fusion centers through the Department of 

16 Homeland Security State, Local, and Regional Fusion 

17 Center Initiative established in accordance with section 

18 210A of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 

19 124h). 

20 (b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

21 (1) FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.—The 

22 term ‘‘foreign terrorist organization’’ means an or23 ganization designated as a foreign terrorist organiza24 tion under section 219 of the Immigration and Na25 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189). 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 2621 IH

1 (2) GHOST GUN.—The term ‘‘ghost gun’’ means 

2 a firearm, including a frame or receiver, that lacks 

3 a unique serial number engraved or cast in metal, 

4 metal alloy, or plastic on the frame or receiver by a 

5 licensed manufacturer or importer, or is otherwise 

6 assembled, molded, machined, or 3D printed without 

7 being associated with a unique serial number. 

8 (3) FRAME OR RECEIVER.—The term ‘‘frame or 

9 receiver’’ means the part of a firearm that can pro10 vide the action or housing for the hammer, bolt, or 

11 breechblock and firing mechanism, and includes a 

12 frame or lower receiver blank, casting, or machined 

13 body that requires further machining or molding to 

14 be used as part of a firearm, and which is designed 

15 or intended to be used in the assembly of a func16 tional firearm. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
No. 09-10531.

#### Adrian Chavez-Silva, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 950, 131 S. Ct. 87,

178 L. Ed. 2d 247,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7830.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 363 Fed. Appx. 484.
No. 10-6669.

#### Malcolm Ladson, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1017, 131 S. Ct. 540,

178 L. Ed. 2d 397,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8422.

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION




The
undersigned officer of Albany Molecular Research, Inc. (the “Company”)
hereby certifies to his knowledge that the Company’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q to which this certification is attached (the “Report”), as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This
certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and
Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”) promulgated
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and the
Exchange Act. In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this
certification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of
that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference
into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the
extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.




Date:
      November 9, 2010/s/ Thomas E. D’AmbraName:
      Thomas E. D’Ambra, Ph.D.Title:
      President and Chief Executive
Officer
No. 09-10560.

#### Leonard Bastida, Petitioner v. James M. LeBlanc, Secretary, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, et al.

562 U.S. 846, 131 S. Ct. 90,

178 L. Ed. 2d 57,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5982.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 372 Fed. Appx. 443.
#### Till, Matter of, v Apex Rehabilitation

3d Dept: 144 AD3d 1231

denied
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 121 (Wednesday, June 24, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 34371]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16718]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-201-001]

Gulf States Transmission Corporation; Notice of Compliance Filing

June 18, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 12, 1998, Gulf States Transmission 
Corporation (Gulf States) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, Sub First Revised Sheet No. 58G. Gulf 
States proposes that the foregoing tariff sheet be made effective on 
June 1, 1998.
    Gulf States states that this filing is in compliance with the 
Commission's May 28, 1998 Letter Order in the above-referenced docket. 
Gulf States further states that the revised tariff sheet incorporates 
by reference the Gas Industry Standards Board Data Dictionaries for 
capacity release.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission 
and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-16718 Filed 6-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```