alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Presidential Documents

34255

Federal Register

Vol. 63, No. 121

Wednesday, June 24, 1998

Title 3—

The President

Presidential Determination No. 98–30 of June 15, 1998

Report to Congress Regarding Conditions in Burma and U.S.

Policy Toward Burma

Memorandum for the Secretary of State

Pursuant to the requirements set forth under the heading ‘‘Policy Toward

Burma’’ in section 570(d) of the FY 1997 Foreign Operations Appropriations

Act, as contained in the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public

Law 104–208), a report is required every 6 months following enactment

concerning:

1) progress towards democratization in Burma;

2) progress on improving the quality of life of the Burmese people, including progress on market reforms, living standards, labor standards, use

of forced labor in the tourism industry, and environmental quality; and

3) progress made in developing a comprehensive multilateral strategy to

bring democracy to and improve human rights practices and the quality

of life in Burma, including the development of a dialogue between the

State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) and democratic opposition

groups in Burma.

You are hereby authorized and directed to transmit the attached report

fulfilling this requirement to the appropriate committees of the Congress

and to arrange for publication of this memorandum in the 

œ–

Federal Register.

THE WHITE HOUSE,

Washington, June 15, 1998. [FR Doc. 98–16984

Filed 6–23–98; 8:45 am]

Billing code 4710–10–M
EXHIBIT 24

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

The undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Kenneth A. Paladino and Marvin
D. Genzer, and each of them, with full power of substitution, the undersigned's
true and lawful attorneys and agents to execute in his name and on his behalf,
in any and all capabilities, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of EDO Corporation
(the "Company"), a New York corporation, for the fiscal year ended December 31,
1995, and any and all other instruments which such attorneys and agents, or
either of them, deem necessary or advisable to enable the Company to comply
with the annual reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and the rules, regulations and requirements of the Securities and
Exchange Commission; and the undersigned hereby ratifies and confirms as his
own act and deed all that such attorneys and agents, and each of them, shall do
or cause to be done by virtue hereof. Either of such attorneys and agents shall
have, and may exercise, all of the powers hereby conferred.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have subscribed their signatures this 22nd
day of March, 1996.

                                   Robert E. Allen
                                   Robert Alvine
                                   Mellon C. Baird
                                   George M. Ball
                                   Alfred Brittain III
                                   Joseph F. Engelberger
                                   Frank A. Fariello
                                   William J. Frost
                                   Marvin D. Genzer
                                   Robert M. Hanisee
                                   Michael J. Hegarty
                                   Ira Kaplan
                                   J. Douglas Moore
                                   Kenneth A. Paladino
                                   George A. Strutz, Jr.
No. 10-5019.

#### Lonnie Joe Jackson, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1056, 131 S. Ct. 639,

178 L. Ed. 2d 471,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9191.

November 29, 2010.

On petition for *472writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit for further consideration in light of Carr v. United States, 560 U.S. 438, 130 S. Ct. 2229, 176 L. Ed. 2d 1152 (2010).
No. 10-5295.

#### Billy J. Lacey, Petitioner v. Correctional Officer Dominguez, et al.

562 U.S. 914, 131 S. Ct. 272,

178 L. Ed. 2d 179,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7421.

October 4, 2010.

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

to: 

Allison Wiedeman, Jack Faulk 

03/03/2010 05:13 PM 

Show Details 

Hi Allison and Jack,

  

I just wanted to let you both know that we worked closely with John Thorne in helping put together aerial

numbers for CropLife America’s NOI threshold document that it sent to you today.  We, too, recommend that

decisions‐makers be the entity responsible for NOI submissions, not for‐hire applicators, because of the

differences in available resources and advanced knowledge as we explained in the letter we sent to the Agency

in November of 2009 (attached).

  

Also, attached is a document we provided CLA for its letter that we put together estimating aerial acres treated

that may be of some assistance as you move through this challenging issue of writing a permit system for

pesticide applications.  Accompanying the document is our 2004 Pesticide Use Survey.

  

Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any questions.

  

Sincerely,

‐‐Andrew—

  

Andrew D. Moore

Executive Director

National Agricultural Aviation Association

1005 E Street, SE

Washington, DC  20003

202‐546‐5722‐phn

202‐546‐5726‐fax

www.agaviation.org

  

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\jfaulk\Local Settings\Temp\notesFCBCEE\~web2558.htm 5/11/2010
# DLA Energy Pacific at Korea command changes hands

/ Published July 5, 2016
SEOUL, Korea,
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 2364** 

ALICE M. BRYANT , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,

v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Asheville

. Max O. Cogburn, Jr. , District Judge. ( 1:13

- cv - 00012

- MOC )

Submitted : May 28, 2014 Decided: June 18, 2014

Before NIE MEYER and GREGORY , Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Charlotte W. Hall, CHARLES T. HALL LAW FIRM, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Paul B. Taylor, Assistant United States Attorney, Anne M. Tompkins, United States Attorney, Hugh Dun Rappaport, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Boston, Massachusetts, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
A lice Bryant appeals the district court ’ s order upholding the Commissioner’s denial of Bryant’s applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income

. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affi rm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Bryant v. Colvin , No. 1:13

- cv - 00012

- MOC (W.D.N.C.
Oct. 8, 2013) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before th is court and argum ent would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2015429EN.01001801.xml

| 21.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 429/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 429/18

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 October 2015 — Éditions Quo Vadis v OHIM — Gómez Hernández (‘QUO VADIS’)

(Case T-517/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ‘QUO VADIS’ - Earlier national word mark QUO VADIS - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 429/23)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Éditions Quo Vadis (Carquefou, France) (represented by: F. Valentin and J. Canlorbe, lawyers)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Francisco Gómez Hernández (Jacarilla, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 July 2013 (Case R 1166/2012-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Francisco Gómez Hernández and Éditions Quo Vadis.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Éditions Quo Vadis to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Éditions Quo Vadis to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 352, 30.11.2013.

1

---
# C_2014448EN.01002201.xml

| 15.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 448/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 448/22

---

Order of the General Court of 16 October 2014 — Mallis et Malli v Commission and ECB

(Case T-327/13) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - Cyprus stability support programme - Declaration of the Eurogroup concerning the restructuring of the banking sector in Cyprus - Erroneous identification of the defendant in the application - Inadmissibility))

(2014/C 448/28)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Constantinos Mallis (Larnaca, Cyprus) and Elli Constantinou Malli (Larnaca, Cyprus) (represented by: E. Efstathiou, K. Efstathiou and K. Liasidou, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendants: European Commission (represented by: B. Smulders, J.-P. Keppenne and M. Konstantinidis, acting as Agents); and European Central Bank (ECB) (represented by: A. Sáinz de Vicuña Barroso, N. Lenihan and F. Athanasiou, acting as Agents, and by W. Bussian, W. Devroe and D. Arts, lawyers)

Defendants:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the declaration of the Eurogroup of 25 March 2013 concerning, inter alia, the restructuring of the banking sector in Cyprus.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Constantinos Mallis and Elli Constantinou Malli are ordered to pay, in addition to their own costs, the costs incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Constantinos Mallis and Elli Constantinou Malli are ordered to pay, in addition to their own costs, the costs incurred by the European Commission and by the European Central Bank (ECB).

---

(1)  OJ C 252, 31.8.2013.

1

---
11 TH C OURT OF A PPEALS E ASTLAND , T EXAS J UDGMENT
Lance Duncan; BHB Operating, Inc.; * From the 70th District Court and Mark IV Energy Holdings, LLC, of Ector County, f/k/a Mark III Energy Holdings, LLC, Trial Court No. A

- 16

- 05

- 0551

- CV

.
Vs. No. 11

- 17

- 00283

- CV * October 19, 2017
Gerald B. Hindy; Assemblies of God * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion Financial Services Group, d/b/a AG (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Financial Solutions; and Steward Willson, J., and Bailey, J. ) Energy Fund, LLC,
This court has considered BHB Operating, Inc.’s motion to dismiss this appeal as to BHB Operating, Inc. only and concludes that the motion should be granted. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, the appeal is dismissed as to BHB Operating, Inc. only. The costs incurred by reason of the dismissed portion of this appeal are taxed against BHB Operating, Inc.
No. 10-7725.

#### Timothy Williams, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1159, 131 S. Ct. 962,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 422.

178 L. Ed. 2d 792,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
# C_2016078EN.01001401.xml

| 29.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/14

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 January 2016 — Ntouvas v ECDC

(Case T-94/13) (1)

1

((Appeal - Civil service - Contract staff - Reports procedure - Career development report - 2010 appraisal procedure - Dismissal of the action at first instance - Time-limit for submission of the defence - Extension - Exceptional circumstances - Article 39(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Civil Service Tribunal - Lawfulness of the appraisal procedure))

(2016/C 078/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Ioannis Ntouvas (Agios Stefanos, Greece) (represented by: V. Kolias, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Center for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) (represented initially by R. Trott, and subsequently by J. Mannheim and A. Daume, acting as Agents, assisted by D. Waelbroeck and A. Duron, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 11 December 2012 in Ntouvas v ECDC (F-107/11, ECR-SC, EU:F:2012:182), and seeking to have that judgment set aside.

Ntouvas

ECDC

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Mr Ioannis Ntouvas to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Ioannis Ntouvas to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 114, 20.4.2013.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM EMUSIC.COM
INC.'S ANNUAL REPORT ON FORMS 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1999, AND
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                      63,232,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  661,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            76,358,000
<PP&E>                                       2,380,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               (569,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             155,927,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,008,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        37,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 152,882,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               155,927,000
<SALES>                                        603,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               603,000
<CGS>                                          172,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  172,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            29,359,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,154,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (27,774,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (27,774,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (27,774,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.31)


</TABLE>
# C_2013215EN.01001701.xml

| 27.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/17

---

Action brought on 31 May 2013 — El Corte Inglés v OHIM — Azzedine Alaïa (ALIA)

(Case T-299/13)

2013/C 215/24

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: E. Seijo Veiguela and J. L. Rivas Zurdo, 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: Azzedine Alaïa (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 General Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 15 March 2013 in Case R 819/2012-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 15 March 2013 in Case R 819/2012-2;

| — | order both OHIM and Azzedine Alaïa to pay the costs of the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order both OHIM and Azzedine Alaïa to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘ALIA’ for goods in Classes 3, 14, 18 and 25 — Community trade mark application No 3 788 999

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Azzedine Alaïa

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: International word mark ‘ALAÏA’ and Community figurative mark ‘ALAÏA PARIS’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 16, 18, 20, 25 and 35 as well as earlier non-registered trade mark ‘ALAÏA’

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in part

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

Pleas in law:

| — | Breach of Rules 20(6) and 50(1) of Regulation No 2868/95 |
| --- | --- |

—

Breach of Rules 20(6) and 50(1) of Regulation No 2868/95

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009

---
---

Exhibit 32

|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-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Report ), I,
James Park, Chief Executive Officer and I, Bong S. Park 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, 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.

/s/ James Park James ParkChief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer 
Date: May 14, 2010

/s/ Bong S. Park Bong S. Park Chief Financial Officer

Date: May 14, 2010

---
Exhibit 21.1

 

 

Subsidiaries of the Company

 

SPD Truck Line, Inc.

Duckwall-ALCO Holdings, LLC

DA Good Buys, Inc.
Exhibit 32.1
Form 10-QSB
Viking Systems, Inc.
File No. 000-49636

                            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 Viking  Systems,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended  September 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Thomas B. Marsh, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company,  certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

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

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

Dated:  January 8, 2004



/s/ Thomas B. Marsh
Chief Executive Officer, President
# C_2014045EN.01003401.xml

| 15.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 45/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/34

---

Order of the General Court of 27 November 2013 — Castell Macía v OHIM — PJ Hungary (PEPE CASTELL)

(Case T-242/13) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of opposition - No need to adjudicate)

2014/C 45/58

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: José Castell Macía (Elche, Spain) (represented by: G. Marín Raigal, P. López Ronda, G. Macias Bonilla and H. Mosback, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: PJ Hungary Szolgáltató kft (PJ Hungary kft) (Budapest, Hungary)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 February 2013 (Case R 1401/2012-1), relating to opposition proceedings between PJ Hungary Szolgáltató kft (PJ Hungary kft) and M. José Castell Macía.

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 is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

1

---