alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 10-5419.

#### Elmo Waid, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 920, 131 S. Ct. 294,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7195.

178 L. Ed. 2d 192,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Logistics Agency
                        The Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency
                    DLA
            Search
                        Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    What DLA Offers
    
        Excess Property Disposal

    Document Services

    Products

    Services

    Programs

    Working With DLA
    
        Applications

    Small Business

    Federal and International Cataloging

    Defense Data Standards

    Events

    Procurement Policies

    Government Programs

    Forms

    Organizations
    
        DLA Headquarters

    DLA Aviation

    DLA Disposition Services

    DLA Distribution

    DLA Energy

    DLA Land and Maritime

    DLA Troop Support

    DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM

    DLA Europe & Africa

    DLA Indo-Pacific

    Customer Support
    
        Self Help Tools

    How to Order

    Find Your Order

    Customer Facing Offices

    Training

    Brochures

    Warfighter Support

    Customer Service Management

    Careers

    About DLA
    
        Contact Us

    Locations

    Leaders

    News

    History

    Media Gallery

    DLA Campaigns  Home
  Land and Maritime
  About
  DLA Land and Maritime Image Galleries
 DLA Land and Maritime images
 Supply Chain Alliance and Exhibition
 DLA Land and Maritime News
 Hall of Fame Ceremonies
 DSCC Activities
 DLA Land and Maritime Hall of Fame ceremonies
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.88 MB)
 
 DSCC DLA news L&M
 Photo Gallery
 2024 DLA Supply Chain Alliance Conference and Exhibition Image Gallery
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.88 MB)
 
 DSCC DLA news L&M
 Photo Gallery
 DLA Land and Maritime news
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.88 MB)
 
 DSCC DLA news L&M
 Photo Gallery
 DSCC activities
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.88 MB)
 
 DSCC DLA news L&M
 Photo Gallery
 Contact UsSite IndexStrategic PlanDLA IG HotlineFOIANo FEAR ActWhistleblower ProtectionDLA CareersImagesWebmasterEEOSection 508Public AffairsSAPRExternal Links DisclaimerDOD Information Quality GuidelinesPrivacy/SecurityUSA.govDOD Web PolicyDOD Open GovernmentPlain Language
                    Stay Connected
            
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 124 (Monday, June 29, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 35244]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17176]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Eye Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.

    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclosed confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which 
would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
    Name of Committee: National Eye Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel.
    Date: July 10, 1998.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: 6120 Executive Blvd., Suite 350, Rockville, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Andrew P. Mariani, Phd, Scientific Review 
Branch, 6130 Executive Blvd., Suite 350.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, 
Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: June 23, 1998.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 98-17176 Filed 6-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
USITC Interactive Tariff and Trade DataWeb Version 3.1.0 Login Screen Direct access to trade data; customized reports; instant answers. Data on extended special tariff programs now available. Complex queries created under "advanced searching" can be saved for future runs. For all users - U.S. imports and exports by your list of products or one at a time. Example: enter Quick Query, select all commodities, Chile, 6-digit aggregation, sort by value, and get the top 10 values, all other, and total-instantly. Sign-in below. The Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) expired on December 31, 2010. Importers are still entering imports with an A, A*, or A+ in the import documents in order to facilitate possible refund of duties paid in the event that the GSP program is reinstated retroactively. In addition, imports from AGOA countries can still enter duty-free under the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) program, but for those products for which a D is not shown in the special rates column of the HTS, an A or A* will be used, which may show up in the data as a GSP entry even though it was actually entered under the authority of AGOA. Enter username and password User Name Password LOG-IN

There is no charge for registration and use. Completion of a brief user registration form is required. This will allow us to analyze usage and costs by user sectors and save your product and country lists for your personal use at another login. CREATE NEW ACCOUNT

FORGOT YOUR PASSWORD? Notice concerning DataWeb user registration and passwords: New users will see the "Create New User Account Form". 3/14/2011 United States International Trade Com...

dataweb.usitc.gov/scripts/user_set.asp 1/2Estimated time to complete the form is two minutes or less. The information in the form is subject to requirements of section 3507, title 44, of the United States Code (the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as amended). This information is gathered pursuant to 19 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Disclosure of the information is voluntary, but failure to provide the information may result in denial of access to the DataWeb. Review DataWeb fine print. 3/14/2011 United States International Trade Com...

dataweb.usitc.gov/scripts/user_set.asp 2/2
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:**

____ 2012

______ - NM -

____ 164

______ - AD **Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significan t? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
No. 09-1445.

#### Josefina Villa, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1060, 131 S. Ct. 636,

178 L. Ed. 2d 476,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9130.

November 29, 2010.

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

Same case below, 589 F.3d 1334.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36215]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17598]


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

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION


National Assessment Governing Board; Meeting

AGENCY: National Assessment Governing Board; Education.

ACTION: Notice of Teleconference.

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

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the schedule and proposed agenda of a 
forthcoming teleconference of the Design and Methodology Committee of 
the National Assessment Governing Board. This notice also describes the 
functions of the Board. Notice of this meeting is required under 
Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
    Date: July 24, 1998.
    Time: 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m.
    Location: National Assessment Governing Board, 800 North Capitol 
Street, N.W., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Ann Wilmer, Operations Officer, National Assessment Governing 
Board, Suite 825, 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., 
20002-4233, Telephone: (202) 357-6938.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Assessment Governing Board is 
established under section 412 of the National Education Statistics Act 
of 1994 (Title IV of the Improving America'a Schools Act of 1994), 
(Pub. L. 103-382).
    The Board is established to formulate policy guidelines for the 
National Assessment of Educational Progress. The Board is responsible 
for selecting subject areas to be assessed, developing assessment 
objectives, identifying appropriate achievement goals for each grade 
and subject tested, and establishing standards and procedures for 
interstate and national comparisons. Under P.L. 205-78, the National 
Assessment Governing Board is also granted exclusive authority over 
developing Voluntary National Tests pursuant to contract number 
RJ97153001
    On July 24, in open session, 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., the Design 
and Methodology Committee will meet to review and approve the final 
pilot test design and sampling plan for the Voluntary National Tests in 
accordance with the prospective authority given to the Committee by the 
Board at its May meeting.
    Records are kept of all Board proceedings and are available for 
public inspection at the U.S. Department of Education, National 
Assessment Governing Board, Suite 825, 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., 
Washington, D.C., from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Roy Truby,
Executive Director, National Assessment Governing Board.
[FR Doc. 98-17598 Filed 7-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-M
# C_2013359EN.01001601.xml

| 7.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/16

---

Action brought on 30 September 2013 — H&M Hennes & Mauritz v OHIM — Yves Saint Laurent (handbags)

(Case T-526/13)

2013/C 359/31

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: H&M Hennes & Mauritz BV & Co. KG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: H. Hartwig and A. von Mühlendahl, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Yves Saint Laurent SAS (Paris, France)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 8 July 2013 given in Case R 208/2012-3; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 8 July 2013 given in Case R 208/2012-3;

| — | Declare the registered Community design No 61 3294-0002 invalid; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare the registered Community design No 61 3294-0002 invalid; and

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings, including those incurred before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs of proceedings, including those incurred before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community design in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: A design for the product ‘handbags’ in Class 03-01 — registered Community design No 61 3294-0002

Registered Community design in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought:

Proprietor of the Community design: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the Community design:

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community design: The applicant

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community design:

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: The grounds were those laid down in Articles 4 to 9 and 25(1)(c), (d), (e), (f) and (g) of Council Regulation No 6/2002

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejected the application for a declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 6 of Council Regulation No 6/2002.

Pleas in law:

---
#### Com. v. Mapp 29

02/08/2016

415 EAL (2015)

29

. Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 122 A.3d 1119
No. 10-440.

#### Manuel Kramer, Petitioner v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Somerville, Massachusetts, et al.

562 U.S. 1091, 131 S. Ct. 796,

178 L. Ed. 2d 531,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9483.

December 6, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appeals Court of Massachusetts denied.

Same case below, 76 Mass. App. 1126, 925 N.E.2d 572.
No. 10-5274.

#### Edward Coleman, aka John Long, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 912, 131 S. Ct. 269,

178 L. Ed. 2d 177,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7427.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 371 Fed. Appx. 288.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Malik Mathis, Appellant.

[61 NYS3d 893]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from judgments of the Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie Wittner, J.), rendered on or about October 8, 2015, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgments so appealed from be and the same are hereby affirmed.

Concur— Acosta, P.J., Friedman, Webber, Oing and Moulton, JJ.
No. 10-5165.

#### Dustin William Sparks, Petitioner v. California.

562 U.S. 1111, 131 S. Ct. 819,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9679.

178 L. Ed. 2d 560,

December 13, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.

Same case below, 48 Cal. 4th 1, 104 Cal. Rptr. 3d 764, 224 P.3d 86.
No. 10-6160.

#### Earnest Lee Walker, Sr., Petitioner v. Deborah Tillman.

562 U.S. 1011, 131 S. Ct. 524,

178 L. Ed. 2d 384,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8551.

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama denied.

Same case below, 55 So. 3d 1214.
#### In the Matter of Kristopher Vagianos, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.

[55 NYS3d 235]

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Margaret A. Chan, J.), entered May 15, 2015, which denied the petition to vacate an arbitration award terminating petitioner’s employment as a tenured school teacher, and granted respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of the hearing officer’s findings that petitioner, a teacher of special-needs students who had previously been disciplined for verbal abuse of one student and corporal punishment of a student confined to a wheelchair, made denigrating comments about the students’ limitations in the presence of other teachers, including referring to them as “waste products,” made inappropriate comments to a student with autism, and made threatening comments to another teacher, our sense of fairness is not shocked by the penalty of termination (see *Matter of Camacho v City of New York,*106 AD3d 574 [1st Dept 2013]; *see also Matter of Haubenstock v City of New York,*130 AD3d 435 [1st Dept 2015]; *Matter of Haas v New York City Dept. of Educ.,*106 AD3d 620 [1st Dept 2013]). Petitioner’s insensitivity to and disrespect for his students “compromised his ability to function as a teacher” (see *Matter of Douglas v New York City Bd./Dept. of Educ., 87*AD3d 856, 857 [1st Dept *5192011]). Moreover, petitioner showed neither remorse for his conduct nor any appreciation of its seriousness so as to suggest that he would not engage in similar conduct again *(see e.g. Matter of Varriale v City of New York,*148 AD3d 650 [1st Dept 2017]). Indeed, petitioner failed to take responsibility for the misconduct for which he had previously been disciplined, and was not deterred by that discipline from continuing his pattern of inappropriate behavior.

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Acosta, P.J., Renwick, Richter, Feinman and Webber, JJ.
# C_2014024EN.01000901.xml

| 25.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/9

---

Appeal brought on 15 November 2013 by Intra-Presse against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 16 September 2013 in Case T-437/11: Golden Balls Ltd v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-582/13 P)

2014/C 24/16

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Intra-Presse (represented by: P. Péters, advocaat, T. de Haan, avocat, M. Laborde, avocate)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs); Golden Balls Ltd

Other parties to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the judgment of the General Court of the European Court of 16 September 2013 in Case T-437/11; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the judgment of the General Court of the European Court of 16 September 2013 in Case T-437/11;

| — | refer the case back to the General Court of the European Union to rule on the action brought by Intra-Presse under Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

refer the case back to the General Court of the European Union to rule on the action brought by Intra-Presse under Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 (1);

1

| — | order that the costs be reserved. |
| --- | --- |

—

order that the costs be reserved.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Appellant submits that the contested judgment should be annulled on the following grounds.

Firstly, the General Court infringed Article 8(1)(b) CTMR in defining the relevant public and in assessing the degree of conceptual similarity between marks by adding a requirement of ‘intellectual process of translation’, ‘begin by translating’ or ‘prior translation’. Secondly, the General Court infringed Article 8(5) CTMR by failing to carry out a global assessment and omitting to examine the relevance of the reputation of Appellant’s earlier mark and the existence of a possible link.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark

1

OJ L 78, p. 1

---
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 13-2851

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Michael Goodale

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

___________________________

No. 13-3150

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Michael Goodale

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

 Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids

____________
 Submitted: March 7, 2014

Filed: March 12, 2014

[Unpublished] 

____________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Michael Goodale was convicted of sexual abuse and child pornography

charges, and was sentenced to life in prison. This court affirmed his conviction and

sentence on direct appeal. See United States v. Goodale, 738 F.3d 917 (8th Cir.

2013). While his direct appeal was pending, Goodale filed three motions in the

district court seeking return of his seized laptop computer under Fed. R. Crim. P.

41(g), discovery and Jencks Act material from the government, his client file and

other items related to his case from his former trial counsel, and an order that the

warden of his prison facility release mail to him. 

We affirm the district court’s denial of Goodale’s Rule 41(g) motion. See 1

Jackson v. United States, 526 F.3d 394, 396-97 (8th Cir. 2008) (Rule 41(g) motion

is properly denied if property is contraband or subject to forfeiture, or government’s

need for property as evidence continues). 

We lack jurisdiction to review the magistrate judge’s denial of the remaining 2

motions, as Goodale did not seek review of the ruling in the district court. See 28

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

1

the Northern District of Iowa.

The Honorable Jon Stuart Scoles, United States Magistrate Judge for the

2

Northern District of Iowa.

-2-
U.S.C. § 636(b)(3); LeGear v. Thalacker, 46 F.3d 36, 37 (8th Cir. 1995) (per curiam)

(magistrate decision issued pursuant to § 636(b)(3) is not final order, and initial

review rests with district court);see also Dieser v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 440 F.3d 920, 923

(8th Cir. 2006) (court will raise jurisdictional issues sua sponte when there is

indication jurisdiction is lacking).

Accordingly, the judgment in Appeal No. 13-2851 is affirmed, and Appeal No.

13-3150 is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

______________________________

-3-