alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A1456. JERRY L. HOWARD v. THE STATE.

Jerry L. Howard wasfound guilty of rape and other crimes, after which he filed

a timely motion for new trial. On September 16, 2014, the trial court entered an order

denying his motion for new trial. On October 17, 2014, Howard filed a pro se notice

of appeal.

1 To be timely, a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after entry

of the appealable order. See OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a

notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. 

Jaheni v. State, 281 Ga. App. 213, 214 (635 SE2d 821) (2006). Because Howard

filed his notice of appeal 31 days after entry of the trial court’s order, this appeal is

untimely. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

1 The court permitted Howard’s attorney to withdraw because he wished to

represent himself on appeal.

04/21/2015

April 21, 2015
# C_2014009EN.01002402.xml

| 11.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 9/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 9/24

---

Action brought on 4 October 2013 — Panrico v OHIM — HDN Development (Krispy Kreme DOUGHNUTS)

(Case T-534/13)

2014/C 9/40

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Panrico, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: D. Pellisé Urquiza, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: HDN Development Corp. (Frankfort, United States of America)

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:

| — | declare the present action admissible; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the present action admissible;

| — | set aside the decision of 25 July 2013 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market in Case R 623/2011-4, notified to the applicant on 29 July 2013; and |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the decision of 25 July 2013 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market in Case R 623/2011-4, notified to the applicant on 29 July 2013; and

| — | declare invalid Community trade mark No 1 298 785‘KRISPY KREME DOUGHNUTS’. |
| --- | --- |

—

declare invalid Community trade mark No 1 298 785‘KRISPY KREME DOUGHNUTS’.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Figurative mark ‘Krispy Kreme DOUGHNUTS’ for products and services in Classes 25, 30 and 42 — Registered Community trade mark No 1 298 785

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

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: HDN Development Corp.

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: Applicant

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark:

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Article 53(1)(a) of that regulation

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Dismissal of the application

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 in conjunction with Article 53(1)(a) of that regulation

Pleas in law:

---
No. 10-6403.

#### Thelma Williams, Jr., Petitioner v. Correctional Officer Hardin, et al.

562 U.S. 1132, 131 S. Ct. 975,

178 L. Ed. 2d 744,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 496.

January 10, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
# Pribble, DLA general counsel, retires after 35 years at DoD

/ Published May 6, 2016
FORT BELVOIR, Virginia,
No. 10-6188.

#### Ralph John Prepetit, Petitioner v. Virginia.

562 U.S. 1125, 131 S. Ct. 854,

178 L. Ed. 2d 585,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9626.

December 13, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 1011, 131 S. Ct. 523, 178 L. Ed. 2d 386, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 8658.
No. 10-6836.

#### Antonio Maurice Montgomery, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1035, 131 S. Ct. 580,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8772.

178 L. Ed. 2d 424,

November 8, 2010.

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

Same case below, 389 Fed. Appx. 321.
No. 09-11145.

#### Ralph Howard Blakely, Petitioner v. Herb Snively, et al.

562 U.S. 1087, 131 S. Ct. 691,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9350.

178 L. Ed. 2d 521,

November 29, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 864, 131 S. Ct. 147, 178 L. Ed. 2d 88, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 6621.
No. 10-34.

#### Charles L. Ryan, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, Petitioner v. Fred Lawrence Robinson.

562 U.S. 1037, 131 S. Ct. 566,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8779.

178 L. Ed. 2d 427,

November 8, 2010.

Motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris granted. Petition for writ of certio-rari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 366 Fed. Appx. 801.
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 Quarterly Report of Ckrush, Inc. (the ‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), I, Jan E. Chason, Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.

Dated: May 20, 2008


By:


/s/ Jan E. ChasonJan E. Chason
Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer


This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

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 with the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, 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.

---
No. 10-505.

#### Mary Jane Stevens, Petitioner v. Andrew Myers Estate.

562 U.S. 1136, 131 S. Ct. 909,

178 L. Ed. 2d 750,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 381,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
No. 10-5622.

#### Henry Rauser, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1125, 131 S. Ct. 853,

178 L. Ed. 2d 584,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9613.

December 13, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 932, 131 S. Ct. 328, 178 L. Ed. 2d 213, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 7623.
No. 10-5107.

#### Christopher McDonald, Petitioner v. Marcus Hardy, Warden.

562 U.S. 904, 131 S. Ct. 242,

178 L. Ed. 2d 161,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6278.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 359 Fed. Appx. 650.
# C_2017309EN.01000201.xml

| 18.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 July 2017 — Council of the European Union v Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Kingdom of the Netherlands, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, European Commission

(Case C-599/14 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Common foreign and security policy - Fight against terrorism - Restrictive measures against certain persons and entities - Freezing of funds - Common Position 2001/931/CFSP - Article 1(4) and (6) - Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 - Article 2(3) - Retention of an organisation on the list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts - Conditions - Factual basis of the decisions to freeze funds - Decision taken by a competent authority - Obligation to state reasons))

(2017/C 309/02)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Council of the European Union (represented by: E. Finnegan, B. Driessen and G. Étienne, Agents)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) (represented by: T. Buruma and A.M. van Eik, advocaten), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M.K. Bulterman and J. Langer, Agents), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Brandon, C. Crane, J. Kraehling and V. Kaye, Agents, and by M. Gray, Barrister), European Commission (represented by: D. Gauci and F. Castillo de la Torre, Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Intervener in support of the appellant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues, F. Fize, D. Colas and B. Fodda, Agents)

Intervener in support of the appellant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE);

| 3. | Orders the French Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Commission to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the French Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the European Commission to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 89, 16.3.2015.

1

---
No. 09-9839.

#### Kevaris Cornelius Edgecomb, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1079, 131 S. Ct. 635,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9091.

178 L. Ed. 2d 510,

November 29, 2010.

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

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

Same case below, 359 Fed. Appx. 84.
No. 09-11195.

#### Heywood Joseph Sholars, Petitioner v. Texas.

562 U.S. 867, 131 S. Ct. 156,

178 L. Ed. 2d 94,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6359.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, First District, denied.

Same case below, 312 S.W.3d 694.
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 Quarterly Report of Viking Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gregory
      M. Decker, 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:





(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: 
      November 15, 2006








/s/
      Gregory M. Decker





Chief
      Financial Officer
# Distribution headquarters celebrates Air Force birthday

/ Published Sept. 20, 2016
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pennsylvania, DLA Distribution headquarters employees gathered to celebrate the 69th birthday of the U.S. Air Force and to recognize two of DLA Distribution's Air Force Reserve employees Sept. 16.
Opening the event, DLA Distribution Commander Army Brig. Gen. John S. Laskodi gave a quick history of our nation’s youngest service branch. He then presented Joint Service Commendation medals to two Air Force Reserve employees for their hard work and dedication to the Distribution hazardous materials mission. 

U.S. Air Force Master Sgt. Carrie Wade and Tech. Sgt. Isaac Johnson were assigned as hazardous material packers with the Joint Reserve Task Force FSG-80 at DLA Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, from October 2015 through June 2016. 

During that time, both Wade and Johnson completed a two-week certification course and nearly 80 hours of follow-on training, which provided them the aptitude to lead a joint team of 20 soldiers, sailors and airmen.

“It was a pleasure and honor to be a part of this Joint Reserve Task Force FSG-80. I look forward to the next mission,” said Wade.

With three major Air Force customer bases DLA Distribution centers are collocated to fulfill both on-base and off-base requirements for Air Force customers. 

DLA Distribution at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, supports two on-base fighter wings and maintenance functions performed by the Ogden Air Logistics Center as well as numerous military units throughout the world.

DLA Distribution Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, provides a full range of distribution services in support of the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base tenants, and other global customers. 

More than half the work completed at the Warner Robins, Georgia, distribution center is in support of the Warner Robins Air Logistics Center.  The organization’s $11 billion inventory includes parts and equipment for F-15, C-130, C-5 and C-17 aircraft, target acquisition systems and most airborne electronic warfare systems.
# C_2013108EN.01003101.xml

| 13.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/31

---

Action brought on 31 January 2013 — Laboratoires Polive/OHIM — Arbora & Ausonia (DODIE)

(Case T-77/13)

2013/C 108/78

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Laboratoires Polive (Levallois Perret, France) (represented by: A. Sion, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Arbora & Ausonia, SL (Barcelona, Spain)

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 contested decision rendered by the second Board of Appeal which has annulled the decision from the Opposition Division, |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the contested decision rendered by the second Board of Appeal which has annulled the decision from the Opposition Division,

| — | Reject the opposition in its entirety, and |
| --- | --- |

—

Reject the opposition in its entirety, and

| — | Order the OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘DODIE’, for goods in classes 3, 5 and 10 — Community trade mark application No 5 665 104

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade marks and national trade marks of figurative and word marks containing the word element ‘DODIS’, ‘DODIES’ or ‘DODOT’ for goods and services in classes 3, 5, 10, 12, 16, 18, 20, 21, 24, 25, 28, 35, and 44

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Upheld the appeal partly and annulled the contested decision with respect to certain goods of classes 3, 5 and 10

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) Council Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CertificationPursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350,As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

The undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer ofNIC Inc. (the “Company) each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for thequarter ended March 31, 2008 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

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

 

 
| Dated: May 12, 2008 |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
|                     |   |
| /s/ Harry H. Herington   |   |
| Harry H. Herington       |   |
| Chief Executive Officer  |   |
|                     |   |
| /s/ Stephen M. Kovzan    |   |
| Stephen M. Kovzan        |   |
| Chief Financial Officer  |   |

 

----
No. 10-6799.

#### Roy C. Hammond, Petitioner v. Tufamerica, Inc.

562 U.S. 1090, 131 S. Ct. 812,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9553.

178 L. Ed. 2d 530,

December 6, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until December 27, 2010, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court. Justice Sotomayor took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion.
# Adventure Flights, Inc

September 15, 2014 U.S. Department ofTransportation Docket Operations, M-30 West Building Ground Floor Room W12-140 1200 New JerseyAvenue, SE Washington DC 20590
Dear D of P Representative, I hereby request to extend my exemption, docket number FAA-2010-0715 for another 24 months. My request for the extension meets the requirements of 14 CFR part 11.

, . 

## I have previously requested this exemption electronicallythrough the web site http://Regulations.g.QY? · ' Thank you. Sincerely,

Jim Bilbrey



# 19301 Jasmine Court, Lake Elsinore, Ca 92530 (951) 678-4334 Fax (951)**67~-2011** 

# Cellular(951) 232-3025
· jim009@jhgn.comDate: ?n/2014 Exemption No: 10155Afrom 14 CFR (FAR Section)- Part: 141.5 

### 016H26522091 will expire on 10/31/2014. Ifappropriate, please submit your request to extend this exemption (including the docket number FAA-2010-0715) within 30 days ofthe**llll!t.IIIC..:"u.;~** date ofthis notice. Otherwise, the FAA may not be able

## ~~~~~~ to process your request for extension before the 

# B 

# $00.322 07/14!2014 Mail4d From 

### 20591 

## US POSTAGE expiration date. You may either submit your request : electronically through the internet using the Docket**~-** ..Management System web site at: 

## 1 http:f/Regulations.gov/or mail your request to: U.S. DepartmentofTransportation DocketOperations, M-30 West Building groundfloor, Room W12-140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Submission to other locations may delay processing. Any requestfor extension must meetthe requirements of 14 CFR 

### part 11.1fyou have already requested an extension for this exemption or no longer need this exemption, please ignore this notice. 

### Jim Bilbrey Jim Bilbreydba Adventure Flights 19301 Jasmine Court Lake Elsinore, CA 92530
# Acquisition Operations’ Skinnell wins Global Distribution Excellence: Acquisition Civilian of the Year award

/ Published Sept. 21, 2015
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pennsylvania, 
Diane Skinnell, acquisition project officer at Defense Logistics Agency Distribution headquarters, has received the Global Distribution Excellence: Acquisition Civilian of the Year award for her outstanding customer support and expert knowledge.

Skinnell leveraged her dynamic energy and more than 30 years of contracting experience and knowledge every day to best serve the division.  “Her work ethic, high standards, and motivational actions in providing acquisition assistance to customers, as well as her tireless devotion to support the warfighter are well deserving of this honor and recognition,” said Perry Knight, Distribution’s chief integration officer.

Skinnell served as lead project officer for acquisitions, exercising independent judgment in overseeing acquisitions, preliminary planning efforts, and progress of project officers and project analysts working with cross-functional and multi organizational subject matter experts.  

As team lead for the Acquisition Planning and Assistance Team, she led her team to complete 52 acquisition assistance projects with a combined estimated value of $213 million.  She oversaw a myriad of acquisitions from those below the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 to more complex acquisitions, such as Business Development Support Services, valued at $8.1 million.

She rendered trusted advice and assistance concerning projects, objectives and problems.  “Her unselfish concern, involvement and consideration for other teammates contributed directly to the team’s sustained high morale,” said Knight.

Skinnell provided direct acquisition assistance for the Disposition to Distribution initiative, contributing to the consolidation of storage and distribution functions between two of DLA’s primary level field activities to increase effectiveness, improve customer experience and reduce enterprise cost by consolidation of resources.

To ensure quality control, Skinnell masterfully developed methods to evaluate team work, solve problems, respond to data calls, correct deficiencies, and assure project objectives were met.  She effectively prompted team members regarding their commitments and responsibilities relative to assigned projects.  She recommended changes and improvements for increased customer service to the team supervisor and alerted the supervisor of project risks along with any proposed contingency plans in time to mitigate the risk more than 80 percent of the time.

As a former contracting officer, Skinnell remained committed to government service by continuing with the Acquisition Planning and Assistance Team. 

“Ms. Skinnell represents the excellence, spirit and dedication of the ideal leader,” said Knight.  “She consistently performed her duties in an outstanding manner and helped contribute directly to the overall mission accomplishments of DLA Distribution Acquisition Operations.”