alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2013147EN.01002701.xml

| 25.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 147/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 147/27

---

Action brought on 21 March 2013 — Benelli Q.J./OHIM — Demharter (MOTO B)

(Case T-169/13)

2013/C 147/48

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Benelli Q.J. Srl (Pesaro, Italy) (represented by: P. Lukácsi, 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: Demharter GmbH (Dillingen, Germany)

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 defendant’s decision and remit the case to OHIM for further examination and a new decision due to the fact that the prior marks of the applicant shall be considered earlier trade marks within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) Council Regulation No 207/2009 and therefore the applicant’s opposition based on likelihood of confusion shall be assessed as to its substance; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the defendant’s decision and remit the case to OHIM for further examination and a new decision due to the fact that the prior marks of the applicant shall be considered earlier trade marks within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) Council Regulation No 207/2009 and therefore the applicant’s opposition based on likelihood of confusion shall be assessed as to its substance;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘MOTO B’ claiming the colours black, white, red, gold, green, brown and grey for goods in classes 9, 12 and 25 — Community trade mark application No 8 780 926

Community trade mark concerned:

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

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Well-known, Italian, non-registered figurative marks «MOTOBI» et al.

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

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

Pleas in law:

---
No. 10-10809.

#### Angel Pagan, Petitioner v. Gary Roden, Superintendent, Massachusetts Correctional Institution at Norfolk.

565 U.S. 851, 132 S. Ct. 175,

181 L. Ed. 2d 86,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6271.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
No. 10-1534.

#### George McReynolds, et al., Petitioners v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.

565 U.S. 827, 132 S. Ct. 119,

181 L. Ed. 2d 43,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5304.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
No. 11-5217.

#### Dennis R. Gilliland, Petitioner v. Glen Turner, Warden.

565 U.S. 895, 132 S. Ct. 283,

181 L. Ed. 2d 169,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5681.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
OAR Box 1784 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

22) II-A-4 

Docket Number: 

A-84-44 

Printed 10/31/2008 8:05:38 AM Sheet 22 of 143 

p.1 
&EPA 

United States Office of Air Quality 

Environmental Protection Planning and Standards 

Agency Research Triangle Park NC 27711 

EPA-450/3-79-0O8 

March 1979 

P.2 

:

 t\-eA-¥t 

A Review of Standard^^r* 

of Performance fqj^New 

Stationary Sources -

Petroleum Refineries 

ULk *1 -ihe £# 

"
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 129 (Tuesday, July 7, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36671]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17896]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. GT98-69-000]


East Tennessee Natural Gas Company; Notice of Refund Report

June 30, 1988.
    Take notice that on June 26, 1998, East Tennessee Natural Gas 
Company (East Tennessee) filed a refund report pursuant to Ordering 
Paragraph (c) of the Commission's February 22, 1995, order in Gas 
Research Institute (GRI), Docket No. RP95-124-000.
    East Tennessee states that East Tennessee received a refund from 
GRI in the amount of $225,767.
    East Tennessee states that it has these refunded amounts to firm 
transportation customers that received nondiscounted service during 
1997 by adjustments to their June invoices.
    East Tennessee states that copies of this filing have been mailed 
to each of East Tennessee's customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or 
before July 7, 1998. Protests will be considered by the Commission in 
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to 
make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection 
in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-17896 Filed 7-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
# Rev E

# Rev D

# Rev C

# Rev B

# Rev A

# Baseline
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 138 (Monday, July 20, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19200]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. RP97-346-000, TM97-3-24-000, and RP98-123-000]


Equitrans, L.P.; Notice Rescheduling Informal Settlement 
Conference

July 14, 1998.
    Take notice that the information settlement conference scheduled to 
convene in this proceeding on Wednesday, July 15, 1998, at 10:00 a.m., 
has been canceled and rescheduled for Wednesday, July 22, 1998, at 
10:00 a.m., at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 
888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC, 20426, for the purpose of 
reviewing the draft settlement documents in the above-referenced 
dockets.
    Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(c), or any participant, as 
defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to attend. Persons wishing to 
become a party must move to intervene and receive intervenor status 
pursuant to the Commissions' regulations (18 CFR 385.214).
    For additional information, please contact Irene E. Szopo at (202) 
208-1602 or Robert A. Young at (202) 208-5705.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-19200 Filed 7-17-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
FCFS 06.12.2014 EXHIBIT 10.1






EXHIBIT 10.1


AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO FIRST AMENDED AND RESTATED 
EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT OF RICK L. WESSEL




This is the Third Amendment (“Third Amendment”) to the First Amended and Restated Executive Employment Agreement of Rick L. Wessel originally entered into as of October 16, 2007, as amended with Amendment No. 1 dated January 1, 2010, and Amendment No. 2 effective as of July 23, 2013 (the "Agreement"), by and between First Cash Financial Services, Inc. (the “Company”), a Delaware corporation, and Rick L. Wessel (the "Executive").  This Third Amendment is effective as of June 12, 2014.      


WHEREAS, Executive is presently serving the Company as Chief Executive Officer and President pursuant to the Agreement, and the parties desire to modify the Agreement as set forth below.


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations hereinafter set forth, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:


		
	1.
	Section 9(d) is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:




“(d)  TERMINATION FOR GOOD CAUSE.


The Executive may terminate his Employment for Good Cause at any time within 180 days after the Executive becomes consciously aware that the facts and circumstances constituting Good Cause exist and are continuing by giving the Company 30 days’ prior written notice that the Executive intends to terminate his Employment for Good Cause, which notice will state with specificity the basis for Executive’s contention that Good Cause exists.  The Executive may not terminate for Good Cause if the facts and circumstances constituting Good Cause are substantially cured by the Company within 30 days following notice to the Company.”


		
	2.
	The definition of “Acquiring Person” in Section 13(b) shall be deleted.




		
	3.
	The definition of “Change of Control” in Section 13(g) shall be deleted.




		
	4.
	The definition of “Good Cause” in Section 13(n) shall be amended by deleting the words: “; or (v) the occurrence of a Change of Control.”




		
	5.
	Except as modified herein, the remainder of the Agreement shall remain unchanged.  











IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this amendment to the Agreement, effective as the date specified above.
	
				
	FIRST CASH FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
	EXECUTIVE

	 
	 
	 
	 

	By:
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 Mikel D. Faulkner
	 
	Rick L. Wessel

	 
	Chairman of the Compensation Committee
	 





2
Form of Common Stock Certificate



 Exhibit 4.1 
  






 
 NUMBER 
TP 
INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 
trupanion® 
Medical insurance for your pet 
SHARES 
SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS 
CUSIP 898202 10 6 
THIS CERTIFIES THAT 
SPECIMEN 
IS THE OWNER OF 
FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE COMMON STOCK, $0.00001 PAR VALUE
PER SHARE, OF 
Trupanion, Inc. 
transferable on the books of the Corporation in
person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of the Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid until countersigned by the Transfer Agent and registered by the Registrar. 
Witness the facsimile signatures of the Corporation’s duly authorized officers. 
Dated:

SECRETARY PRESIDENT 
AMERICAN BANK NOTE COMPANY. 
COUNTERSIGNED AND REGISTERED: 
AMERICAN STOCK TRANSFER & TRUST COMPANY, LLC. 
(Brooklyn, NY) 
By 
Transfer Agent and Registrar 
Authorized Officer 







 



 
 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Certificate, shall be construed as though they were
written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
TEN COM—as tenants in common 
TEN ENT —as tenants by the entireties 
JT TEN —as joint tenants with right of
survivorship and not as tenants in common 
UNIF GIFT MIN ACT — Custodian

(Cust) (Minor) 
under Uniform Gifts to Minors 
Act 
(State) 
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 
For value received,
hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto 
PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER

IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE 
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS,
INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE) 
shares represented by the within Certificate, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint , attorney to transfer the said
shares on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. 
Dated 
NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY
CHANGE WHATEVER. 
Signature(s) Guaranteed: 
THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED
BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
Skylift Global, Inc. 6/2/2016

Jesse Moore, CTO

722 Via Cafetal

San Marcos, CA 92069

(844) 475­9543 ext. 702

jesse.moore@skyliftglobal.com

Petition for External Load and MTOW

Exemption

Skylift has built a logistics support UAS designed to lift heavy payloads. Our

patent­pending swashless system allows us to safely and reliably lift payloads many

times the vehicle’s own weight. Our current vehicle, the Phase II, is capable of lifting at

least four times its own weight. This UAS can offer the capabilities of a helicopter at a

fraction of the size, making aerial lift capability accessible to new underserved markets

that could not practically use a helicopter.

In order to safely demonstrate this payload capacity and determine the real­world

performance of our vehicle, this petition is a request for exemption from the following

sections of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) under Part 11.

● We request exemption from 14 CFR Part 27 Subpart B.

○ We have built a heavy­lift commercial UAS capable of reducing risk, time and

cost in the workplace by removing workers from harm’s way.

○ Our Phase II weighs 50 lbs. without batteries. It will weigh closer to 85 lbs. with

batteries and potentially up to 100 lbs. with third party sensors, cameras and

mounting hardware.

■ We request an exemption from 14 CFR Part 27.25 to allow our vehicle a

maximum take­off weight (MTOW) of 100 lbs.

○ The reason for this additional weight is the vehicle’s carbon fiber and aluminum

construction. The airframe needs to be robust enough to support heavy payloads.

Using plastic composites, removing mechanical redundancies and backup

batteries would reduce the take­off weight below 55 lbs., but would compromise

vehicle safety and reliability.
Skylift Global, Inc. 6/2/2016

○ To further increase safety, the PIC, VO and all other persons will maintain a

minimum distance of 200 ft. from the aircraft during takeoff and landing

procedures.

● We request exemption from 14 CFR Part 27 Subpart B.

○ Removing the task of carrying heavy loads is an important way to reduce risk,

time and cost. Lifting heavy loads is one of the most common causes of

workplace injury according to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics.

○ Designed to carry payloads over 200 lbs., we request an exemption from 14 CFR

Part 27.865 and 27.337 through 27.341 allowing an external load of 300 lbs. in

addition to the requested 100­lb. MTOW.

○ Because our vehicle uses autorotation, in compliance with 14 CFR Part 27.71 it

does not have the dangers of falling out of the sky like other UAS. The heavier

payloads actually decrease the speed of descent during autorotation, making the

vehicle safer and more predictable in the event of an emergency.

○ All load attachments will follow the more stringent standards for human external

cargo, utilizing quick­release and redundant devices for load carrying.

In addition to our 333 Exemption, we believe that these exemptions will increase the safety and

reliability of our vehicle for its intended uses.
_ 

but review the court's application of the law to those facts de novo. Lader 

v. Warden,121 Nev. 682, 686, 120 P.3d 1164, 1166 (2005). 

First, Duke argues that the district court erred by denying his 

claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate. Duke 

claims that an investigation would have revealed that the owner of the 

vehicle that he was driving when arrested had a long history of prior drug 

convictions, and because Duke was arrested in the owner's neighborhood, 

counsel could have argued that Duke was acting only as a transporter for 

the owner. Duke claims that this theory could have been supported by 

evidence that the owner was subsequently arrested on drug trafficking 

charges. The district court conducted an evidentiary hearing and 

concluded that Duke was not prejudiced because, even if counsel had 

investigated further, the investigation would not have revealed any 

information that would have changed the result at trial. The district court 

also concluded that because Duke testified at the evidentiary hearing that 

he was not acting as a transporter for the vehicle owner and he told 

counsel the same, counsel was not ineffective for failing to investigate a 

defense contradictory to his client's story. We conclude that the district 

court did not err by denying this claim. 

Second, Duke argues that the district court erred by denying 

his claim that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to argue that his 

dual convictions for transportation of a controlled substance and 

trafficking in a controlled substance violated double jeopardy. The district 

court determined that this claim lacked merit. Because neither statute 

expressly allows for or prohibits multiple convictions, see NRS 453.321, 

NRS 453.3385, and each offense, as charged, requires proof of an element 

that the other does not, the Double Jeopardy Clause is not implicated. See 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2 
ibbons 

J. 

Jackson v. State, 128 Nev. „ P.3d (2012) (Adv. Op. No. 

55, December 6, 2012). Therefore, appellate counsel was not deficient and 

the district court did not err by denying this claim. 

Third, Duke argues that the district court erred by denying his 

petition because counsels' ineffectiveness denied him equal protection. 

Because trial and appellate counsel were not ineffective, we conclude this 

claim is without merit. 

Having considered Duke's contentions and concluded that they 

lack merit, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

1RDouglas DIA-21 Saitta 

cc: Hon. Elissa F. Cadish, District Judge 

Matthew D. Carling 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A .; 

3
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 137 (Friday, July 17, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19073]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Thompson Creek Supplemental Plan of Operation; Challis National 
Forest, Custer County, Idaho

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period and correction.

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

SUMMARY: The notice of availability for the Draft Supplemental 
Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) for the Thompson Creek Mine 
Supplemental Plan of Operation published in the June 19, 1998 Federal 
Register (Vol. 63, No. 118, 33651) indicated the close of the comment 
period was August 3, 1998. The comment period has now been extended to 
August 17, 1998.
    The Notice of Intent to Repair a Supplemental Environmental Impact 
Statement published in the February 9, 1995 Federal Register (Vol. 60, 
No. 27, 7748-7750) indicated that the Forest Supervisor was the 
responsible official. The responsible has now been changed to the 
Regional Forester, Jack A. Blackwell.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Leon Jadlowski, Acting Yankee Fork District Ranger, HC 67 Box 650, 
Clayton, ID 83227. Telephone (208) 838-3300.

    Dated: July 13, 1998.
Christopher L. Pyron,
Deputy Regional Forester, Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-19073 Filed 7-16-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
##### 



(ECC LETTERHEAD)

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003 (18 U.S.C. §1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2003 (18 U.S.C. §1350),
the undersigned, Melissa Van Valkenburgh, Chief Financial Officer of ECC
International Corp., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby
certify, to her knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2003 of the Company
(the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

| |  |                               
| |  | ------------------------------
| |  | /s/ Melissa A. Van Valkenburgh
| |  |                               
| |  | Melissa A. Van Valkenburgh    
| |  | Chief Financial Officer       
| |  | September 9, 2003             

Page 56 of 56
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>

TOTAL-TEL USA COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

Exhibit 27 - FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE

THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION 
EXTRACTED FROM THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF 
DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF 
OPERATIONS FOR TWELVE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         711,800
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,845,700
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,709,600
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,652,400
<PP&E>                                       8,438,800
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,934,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,201,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,264,700
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                     8,293,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  5,400,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  (7,847,700)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,201,700
<SALES>                                     11,911,200
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            11,911,200
<CGS>                                        9,657,700
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,657,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,638,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             129,200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (296,200)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (296,200)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (296,200)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.04)
        




</TABLE>
No. 10-11074.

#### Devell Short, Petitioner v. Joseph F. Mazurkiewicz, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Greensburg, et al.

565 U.S. 865, 132 S. Ct. 210,

181 L. Ed. 2d 114,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6719.

October 3, 2011.

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