alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 21Subsidiaries of the Company as of February 1, 2006Parent Level: R.H. Donnelley Corporation (formerly known as The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation), aDelaware corporation; publicly traded on NYSE as “RHD”Tier 1 Subsidiaries: R.H. Donnelley Inc. (formerly known as The Reuben H. DonnelleyCorporation), a Delaware corporation wholly owned by R.H. Donnelley Corporation DexMedia, Inc. (formerly known as Forward Acquisition Corp, a newlyformed entity established to merge with and survive Dex Media, Inc.,the public holding company formerly traded on NYSE as “Dex”), aDelaware corporation wholly owned by R.H. Donnelley CorporationTier 2 Subsidiaries (all 100% owned by R.H.Donnelley Inc.):DonTech Holdings, LLC*Get Digital Smart.com Inc.**R.H. Donnelley APIL, Inc**R.H. Donnelley Publishing & Advertising, Inc.***R.H. Donnelley Publishing & Advertising of Illinois Holdings,LLC*Tier 3 Subsidiaries (both 100% owned by R.H. Donnelley Inc.and another Tier 2 subsidiary):The DonTech II Partnership****
#### People v Moore (Richard)

4th Dept: 140 AD3d 1684 (Niagara)

denied 8/29/16 (Pigott, J.)
# C_2015198EN.01003601.xml

| 15.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 198/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 198/36

---

Judgment of the General Court of 30 April 2015 — Steinbeck v OHIM — Alfred Sternjakob (BE HAPPY)

(Joined Cases T-707/13 and T-709/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word marks BE HAPPY - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 52(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 198/48)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Steinbeck GmbH (Fulda, Germany) (represented by: M. Heinrich and M. Fischer, lawyers)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Alfred Sternjakob GmbH & Co. KG (Frankenthal, Germany) (represented by: S. Henn and S. Tepel, lawyers)

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

Re:

Re:

Two actions brought against the decisions of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 October 2013 (Cases R 31/2013-1 and R 32/2013-1), concerning invalidity proceedings between Alfred Sternjakob GmbH & Co. KG and Steinbeck GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the actions; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the actions;

| 2. | Orders Steinbeck GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Steinbeck GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 61, 1.3.2014.

1

---
# C_2014024EN.01004101.xml

| 25.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/41

---

Action brought on 25 October 2013 — ZZ v European Commission

(Case F-107/13)

2014/C 24/76

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: É. Boigelot and R. Murru, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the Commission’s decision to impose a disciplinary penalty on the applicant under Article 9(2) of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations and an application for damages for the non-material harm allegedly suffered and an application for reimbursement of the sums already withheld.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | Annul the decision of 14 March 2013 imposing on him a penalty of the reduction of his monthly net pension by one third for a two-year period; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 14 March 2013 imposing on him a penalty of the reduction of his monthly net pension by one third for a two-year period;

| — | Order the defendant to pay compensation to the applicant for the harm suffered, fixed at the total sum off EUR 10 000, subject to being increased during the proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay compensation to the applicant for the harm suffered, fixed at the total sum off EUR 10 000, subject to being increased during the proceedings;

| — | Order the Commission to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay all the costs.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0056

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

vs. 

CHAD JEROME WOLFCHILD,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including August 2, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 26 2024

06/26/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0056
EXHIBIT 32.1


        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 the Annual Report of DYNASIL CORPORATION OF
AMERICA (the "Company") on Form 10KSB for the year ended
September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Craig T.
Dunham, President and Chief Executive Officer and Acting 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 result of operations of the Company.



                                    /s/ Craig Dunham
                                   -------------------
                                   Craig Dunham
                                   President, Chief Executive
                                   Officer and Acting Chief
                                   Financial Officer

December 21, 2004
No. 09-1457.

#### Maritima Mexicana, S.A. de C.V., aka MarMex, Petitioner v. Perforaciones Exploracion Y Produccion, aka Protexa, et al.

562 U.S. 834, 131 S. Ct. 140,

178 L. Ed. 2d 35,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6283.

October 4, 2010.

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

*36Same case below, 356 Fed. Appx. 675.
# C_2016156EN.01003301.xml

| 2.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 156/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/33

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 March 2016 — Karl-May-Verlag v OHIM — Constantin Film Produktion (WINNETOU)

(Case T-501/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark WINNETOU - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 52(1) and (2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Principles of autonomy and independence of the Community trade mark - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 156/42)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Karl-May-Verlag GmbH, formerly Karl May Verwaltungs- und Vertriebs- GmbH (Bamberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Pejman and M. Brenner, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by A. Pohlmann, and subsequently by M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Constantin Film Produktion GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: P. Baronikians and S. Schmidt, lawyers)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 July 2013 (Case R 125/2012-1), concerning invalidity proceedings between Constantin Film Produktion GmbH and Karl-May Verwaltungs- und Vertriebs- GmbH.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 9 July 2013 (Case R 125/2012-1) in so far as it rejected the application for a declaration of invalidity; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 9 July 2013 (Case R 125/2012-1) in so far as it rejected the application for a declaration of invalidity;

| 2. | Orders OHIM to bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by Karl-May-Verlag GmbH; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders OHIM to bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by Karl-May-Verlag GmbH;

| 3. | Orders Constantin Film Produktion GmbH to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Constantin Film Produktion GmbH to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 336, 16.11.2013.

1

---
No. 10-218.

#### PPL Montana, LLC, Petitioner v. Montana.

562 U.S. 1000, 131 S. Ct. 552,

178 L. Ed. 2d 367,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8540.

November 1, 2010.

The Acting Solicitor General is invited to file a brief in this case expressing the views of the United States.
<PAGE>
 
Coopers & Lybrand Consent

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements of Dynatech Corporation on Form S-3 (File Nos. 2-78465, 2-81026,
2-82260, 2-85387, 2-86457, 2-92391, 2-94757, 33-365, 33-2387, 33-5544, 33-17169,
33-24058, 33-30610 and 33-62551), on Form S-4 (File No. 333-44933) and on Form
S-8 (File Nos. 2-87779, 33-10465, 33-17243, 33-42427, 33-50768, 33-57491,
33-57495, 33-16461, and 333-01639) of our reports dated April 28, 1998, except
for the "Subsequent Event" note, for which the date is May 21, 1998, on our
audits of the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule
of Dynatech Corporation as of March 31, 1998 and 1997 and for each of the three
fiscal years in the period ended March 31, 1998, which reports are included in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



/s/ COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.



Boston, Massachusetts
June 26, 1998
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT (4)(c)

October 26, 2004

Ms. Suzanne Swits

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Vice President Account Management
Shareowner Services
161 North Concord Exchange
South St. Paul, MN 55075-1139

Subject: Appointment of Wells Fargo as Rights Agent

Ms. Swits:

By this letter, I, Douglas M. Ventura, Executive Vice President Operations,
General Counsel and Secretary, appoint Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Rights Agent
for The Reynolds and Reynolds Company Amended and Restated Shareholder Rights
Agreement (the"Rights Agreement"), effective as of the date of your acceptance
on page 2 of this letter. This appointment is made pursuant to Section 21 of the
Rights Agreement. The appointment is being made following the termination of
Mellon Investor Services, LLC as Rights Agent under the same Rights Agreement.

We appreciate your agreeing to serve as our Rights Agent, and we look forward to
continuing to do business with you in your capacity as Rights Agent and Transfer
Agent.

Please acknowledge your acceptance of this appointment by signature below, and
return one original of this letter to me at the address above.

Sincerely,

Douglas M. Ventura

DMV/ksb

<PAGE>

Suzanne Swits
Page 2
October 26, 2004

I hereby acknowledge and accept this appointment on behalf of Wells Fargo Bank,
N.A.:

Name: _______________________________     Signature: ___________________________

Title:_________________________________________ Date:___________________________
No. 10-6862.

#### LaDonna Mullins, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1035, 131 S. Ct. 582,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8696.

178 L. Ed. 2d 425,

November 8, 2010.

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

Same case below, 613 F.3d 1273.
No. 08-9560.

#### Montrell McSwain, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1077, 131 S. Ct. 631,

178 L. Ed. 2d 507,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9209.

November 29, 2010.

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

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

Same case below, 553 F.3d 519.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-10429

Conference Calendar

 

BRENDA ROBERTSON FINE,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

JOSEPH B. BOGAN, Warden; CARSWELL FEDERAL MEDICAL CENTER;

FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF

JUSTICE,

Respondents-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:00-CV-127-Y

- - - - - - - - - -

October 17, 2000

Before SMITH, and BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Brenda Robertson Fine, federal prisoner # 27050-077, appeals

from the dismissal with prejudice of her 28 U.S.C. § 2241

petition. The district court held, because Fine was challenging

errors that were alleged to have occurred during or before

sentencing, her claims must be raised in a motion filed pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and that the only court with jurisdiction to

consider her § 2255 motion was the district court in which she

was sentenced. Fine argues on appeal that she is entitled to
No. 00-10429

-2-

application of the “savings clause” of § 2255 because she is

barred by limitations from filing a § 2255 motion.

Fine has failed to show that the remedies provided for under

§ 2255 are inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of her

detention. See Cox v. Warden, Fed. Detention Ctr., 911 F.2d

1111, 1113 (5th Cir. 1990). The district court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED.

Fine’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED.
##### 



Exhibit 32.4 EAGLEPICHER TECHNOLOGIES, LLC 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 the Annual Report of EaglePicher Technologies, LLC (the Company) on Form
10-K for the period ended November 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Shane Dryanski, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company. /s/ SHANE DRYANSKI
    
    Date: March 14, 2005Shane
Dryanski, Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 24288]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09692]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8290]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Frida Kahlo, Diego Rivera, and Masterpieces of Modern 
Mexico: The Jacques and Natasha Gelman Collection''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority 
No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Frida Kahlo, Diego Rivera, and 
Masterpieces of Modern Mexico: The Jacques and Natasha Gelman 
Collection,'' imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the 
United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported 
pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I 
also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at 
the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Kansas City, Missouri, from on or 
about June 1, 2013, until on or about August 18, 2013, and at possible 
additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is in the 
national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these 
Determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: April 16, 2013.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2013-09692 Filed 4-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
No. 09-11369.

#### Antonio M. Byrd, Petitioner v. Henry Steward, et al.

562 U.S. 876, 131 S. Ct. 186,

178 L. Ed. 2d 112,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6606.

October 4, 2010.

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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2246 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2246

  To require the Secretary of the Treasury to include organ donation 
        information with individual income tax refund payments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                June 28 (legislative day, June 7), 1994

  Mr. Dorgan introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To require the Secretary of the Treasury to include organ donation 
        information with individual income tax refund payments.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Organ Donation Insert Card Act''.

SEC. 2. ORGAN DONATION INFORMATION INCLUDED WITH INCOME TAX REFUND 
              PAYMENTS.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall include with 
any payment of a refund of individual income tax made during the period 
beginning on February 1st of the first calendar year beginning more 
than 4 months after the date of the enactment of this Act and ending on 
June 30th of such year a copy of the document described in subsection 
(b).
    (b) Text of Document.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall, after 
consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and 
organizations promoting organ donation, prepare a document suitable for 
inclusion with individual income tax refund payments which--
            (1) encourages organ donation;
            (2) includes a detachable organ donor card; and
            (3) urges recipients to--
                    (A) sign the organ donor card;
                    (B) discuss organ donation with family members and 
                tell family members about the recipient's desire to be 
                an organ donor if the occasion arises; and
                    (C) encourage family members to request or 
                authorize organ donation if the occasion arises.
                                 <all>
```
No. 10-202.

#### Gary N. Weintraub, Administrator of the Estate of David H. Weintraub, Petitioner v. Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New York, et al.

562 U.S. 995, 131 S. Ct. 444,

178 L. Ed. 2d 344,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8218.

October 18, 2010.

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

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

Same case below, 593 F.3d 196.
Exhibit 32

SECTION 906 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 the quarterly report of Lexon Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Kenneth J. Eaken, Principal Executive Officer and Principal 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, to
the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

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


Date: November 19, 2004     /S/Kenneth J. Eaken
                            Principal Executive Officer
                            Principal Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
EXHIBIT 32.2



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 the Annual Report
of Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David L. Hauser, Group Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer of Duke Energy, 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 Duke Energy.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                              
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    DAVID L. HAUSER                                                        
|David L. Hauser Group Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer March 3, 2006