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

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 884 

Designating the week of September 22 through September 28, 2024, as 

‘‘Gold Star Families Remembrance Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2024 

Mrs. HYDE-SMITH (for herself and Mr. WARNOCK) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating the week of September 22 through September 

28, 2024, as ‘‘Gold Star Families Remembrance Week’’. 

Whereas the last Sunday in September— 

(1) is designated as ‘‘Gold Star Mother’s Day’’ 

under section 111 of title 36, United States Code; and 

(2) was first designated as ‘‘Gold Star Mother’s 

Day’’ under the Joint Resolution entitled ‘‘Joint Resolution designating the last Sunday in September as ‘Gold 

Star Mother’s Day’, and for other purposes’’, approved 

June 23, 1936 (49 Stat. 1895); 

Whereas there is no date dedicated to families affected by the 

loss of a loved one who died in service to the United 

States; 

Whereas a gold star symbolizes a family member who died in 

the line of duty while serving in the Armed Forces; 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 884 ATS 

Whereas the members and veterans of the Armed Forces, 

through their service, bear the burden of protecting the 

freedom of the people of the United States; 

Whereas the selfless example of the service of the members 

and veterans of the Armed Forces, as well as the sacrifices made by the families of those individuals, inspires 

all individuals in the United States to sacrifice and work 

diligently for the good of the United States; and 

Whereas the sacrifices of the families of the fallen members 

of the Armed Forces and the families of veterans of the 

Armed Forces should never be forgotten: Now, therefore, 

be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates the week of September 22 

3 through September 28, 2024, as ‘‘Gold Star Fami4 lies Remembrance Week’’; 

5 (2) honors and recognizes the sacrifices made 

6 by— 

7 (A) the families of members of the Armed 

8 Forces who made the ultimate sacrifice in order 

9 to defend freedom and protect the United 

10 States; and 

11 (B) the families of veterans of the Armed 

12 Forces; and 

13 (3) encourages the people of the United States 

14 to observe Gold Star Families Remembrance Week 

15 by— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 884 ATS 

1 (A) performing acts of service and good 

2 will in their communities; and 

3 (B) celebrating families in which loved 

4 ones made the ultimate sacrifice so that others 

5 could continue to enjoy life, liberty, and the 

6 pursuit of happiness. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7700

MICHAEL RAY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus THEODIS BECK, Secretary of Corrections; BOYD BENNETT, Director of Prisons; JOHN AND JANE DOES, Utilization Review Board; CURTIS BOWE, P.A.; MARVIN L. POLK; PAULA SMITH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. (CA-03-708-5-FL) Submitted: February 19, 2004 Decided: February 26, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Ray Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Michael Ray Williams appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Williams v. Beck , No. CA-03-708-5-FL (E.D.N.C. Oct. 1, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2021062EN.01005101.xml

| 22.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 62/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 62/51

---

Order of the General Court of 5 January 2021 — CP v Parliament

(Case T-5/20) (1)

(2021/C 62/63)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 247 (Thursday, December 26, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 105160]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30767]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-518, OMB Control No. 3235-0576]

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Extension: Regulation 
G

    Upon Written Request Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 
20549-2736

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved 
collection of information discussed below.
    Regulation G (17 CFR 244.100--244.102) under the Securities 
Exchange Act of 1934 (the ``Exchange Act'') (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) 
requires publicly reporting companies that disclose or releases 
financial information in a manner that is calculated or presented other 
than in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles 
(``GAAP'') to provide a reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial 
information to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure. 
Regulation G implemented the requirements of Section 401 of the 
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 7261). We estimate that 
approximately 7,196 public companies must comply with Regulation G 
approximately six times a year for a total of 43,176 responses 
annually. We estimated that it takes approximately 0.5 hours per 
response (0.5 hours per response x 43,176 responses) for a total 
reporting burden of 21,588 hours annually.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid control number.
    Public comment instructions: The public may view and comment on 
this information collection request at: https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=202412-3235-021 or send an email comment to 
[email protected] within 30 days of the day 
after publication of this notice by January 27, 2025.

    Dated: December 19, 2024.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-30767 Filed 12-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
```
# C_2021278EN.01004201.xml

| 12.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/42

---

Judgment of the General Court of 2 June 2021 — adp Gauselmann v EUIPO — Gameloft (GAMELAND)

(Case T-17/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark GAMELAND - Earlier EU word mark Gameloft - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Restriction of the services covered in the trade mark application)

(2021/C 278/58)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: adp Gauselmann GmbH (Espelkamp, Germany) (represented by: K. Mandel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Gameloft SE (Paris, France) (represented by M. Decker, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 November 2019 (Case R 2502/2018 5) relating to opposition proceedings between Gameloft and adp Gauselmann.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders adp Gauselmann GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders adp Gauselmann GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-31235

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff−Appellee,

versus

RICHARD ALAN SMITH,

Defendant−Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

No. 6:17-CR-327-6

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Richard Smith has moved to 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 

5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 10, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-31235 Document: 00515112390 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/10/2019
No. 18-31235

2

withdraw and has filed a brief per Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), 

and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Smith has not filed 

a response. 

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record. 

We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion to withdraw is GRANTED, 

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is 

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. 

 Case: 18-31235 Document: 00515112390 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/10/2019
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, David W. Carter, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in my capacity as an officer of
Xenogen Corporation, that, to my knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Xenogen Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Xenogen Corporation.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Xenogen Corporation and will be retained by Xenogen
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|                         |  |        |  |                        
|------------------------ |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Dated: November 15, 2004 |  | By:    |  | /s/ David W. Carter    
|                         |  | Name:  |  | David W. Carter        
|                         |  | Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer



I, William A. Albright, Jr., certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in my capacity as an officer of Xenogen Corporation, that, to my knowledge, the Quarterly Report of Xenogen Corporation on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Xenogen Corporation.



A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Xenogen Corporation and will be retained by Xenogen Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|                         |  |        |  |                             
|------------------------ |  | ------ |  | ----------------------------
|Dated: November 15, 2004 |  | By:    |  | /s/ William A. Albright, Jr.
|                         |  | Name:  |  | William A. Albright, Jr.    
|                         |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
# C_2016462EN.01002601.xml

| 12.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 462/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 462/26

---

Action brought on 30 September 2016 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — Ascendo Medienagentur (SLIMDYNAMICS)

(Case T-700/16)

(2016/C 462/33)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: S. Correa Rodríguez, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ascendo Medienagentur AG (Gamprin-Bendern, Liechtenstein)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

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

Applicant:

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word element ‘SLIMDYNAMICS’ — Application for registration No 12 882 304

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 July 2016 in Joined Cases R 1814/2015-4 and R 1780/2015-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | revoke the contested decision regarding the granting of goods in class 5 and reject EUTM No. 012882304 SLIM DYNAMICS & design in class 5; and |
| --- | --- |

—

revoke the contested decision regarding the granting of goods in class 5 and reject EUTM No. 012882304 SLIM DYNAMICS & design in class 5; and

| — | order EUIPO and, in case it decides to intervene in the present proceedings, ASCENDO MEDIENAGENTUR AG, to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and, in case it decides to intervene in the present proceedings, ASCENDO MEDIENAGENTUR AG, to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

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

—

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

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 692]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31707]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: January 6, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 19, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1144 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-929, K2025-930.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-31707 Filed 1-3-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
# C_2021462EN.01001901.xml

| 15.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 462/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 462/19

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 September 2021 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-169/20) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Article 110 TFEU - Internal taxation - Discriminatory taxation - Prohibition - Second-hand vehicles imported from other Member States - Component of the registration tax calculated on the basis of carbon dioxide emissions - Failure to take into account the depreciation of the vehicle)

(2021/C 462/18)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: initially, M. França and C. Perrin, and, subsequently, G. Braga da Cruz and C. Perrin, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, N. Vitorino, A. Pimenta, P. Barros da Costa and S. Jaulino, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by excluding the depreciation of the environmental component in the calculation of the applicable value of second-hand vehicles put into circulation in the Portuguese territory and purchased in another Member State when calculating the vehicle tax as provided for by the Código do imposto sobre veículos (code covering vehicle tax), as amended by the lei 71/2018 (Law No 71/2018), the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 110 TFEU; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by excluding the depreciation of the environmental component in the calculation of the applicable value of second-hand vehicles put into circulation in the Portuguese territory and purchased in another Member State when calculating the vehicle tax as provided for by the Código do imposto sobre veículos (code covering vehicle tax), as amended by the lei 71/2018 (Law No 71/2018), the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 110 TFEU;

| 2. | Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.

---
Gerald T. RAINEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-3556

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[January 31, 2019]

Affirmed.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WICHITA FALLS DIVISION

CLIFFORD BROWN, §

 §

Plaintiff, §

§

vs. § Civil Action No. 7:03-cv-0205-R

§

DON PETERSON AND NORTH §

CENTRAL TIRE SERVICE, INC., §

 §

Defendants. §

FINAL JUDGMENT

The Court held a trial in this case on February 6, 2006. At trial, both Plaintiff and Defendant

announced ready. The case was then duly tried to a jury, which returned its verdict on February 8,

2006. The jury found that Plaintiff did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he

engaged in protected activity under Title VII or was exposed to a hostile work environment.

Accordingly, the Court disposes of this action as follows:

It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiff take nothing by his claims.

Each party shall bear its own costs. 

This judgment finally disposes of all claims asserted in this lawsuit by Clifford Brown

against North Central Tire Service and Don Peterson. This order shall constitute the final judgment

in this case and is appealable. 

IT IS SO ORDERED _________________________________

JUDGE JERRY BUCHMEYER

SIGNED: May 25, 2006 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WICHITA FALLS DIVISION

FILED

May 25, 2006

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT

Case 7:03-cv-00205-R Document 66 Filed 05/25/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 385
Order entered November 6, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 14 - 00524 - CV COLLIN CENTRAL APPRA ISAL DISTRICT, Appellant V. COLLIN CREEK MALL, L LC, Appellee On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court Collin Co unty, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219 - 03582 - 2011 

### O RDER We GRANT appellee’s November 4, 2014 unopposed motion to substitute lead counsel. We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to substitute Jason C. Marshall with The Marshall Firm, PC as lead counsel for app ellee in the place of Melinda D. Blackwell with Blackwell & Duncan, PLLC.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
# C_2022002EN.01003801.xml

| 3.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/38

---

Order of the General Court of 3 November 2021 — ExxonMobil Production Deutschland v Commission

(Case T-731/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Environment - Directive 2003/87/EC - Greenhouse gases - Allocation of emission allowances - Request to transfer emission certificates to Germany - Request made in the context of national proceedings for interim relief aimed at guaranteeing the effectiveness of the preliminary ruling procedure in Case C-126/20 - Commission refusal decision - Locus standi - Lack of individual concern - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 2/52)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: ExxonMobil Production Deutschland GmbH (Hanover, Germany) (represented by: S. Altenschmidt and J. Hoss, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. De Meester and G. Wils, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission’s letter of 8 December 2020 refusing the request of the Deutsche Emissionshandelsstelle (German Emissions Trading Authority) to transfer, as a protective measure, to the national holding account of the Federal Republic of Germany or, in the alternative, to the applicant’s operator holding account, by 31 December 2020 at the latest, a number of greenhouse gas emission allowances corresponding to the number of additional allowances covered by the application filed by the applicant with the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin (Administrative Court, Berlin, Germany) for the free allocation of emission allowances for the third greenhouse gas emission allowance trading period.

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | ExxonMobil Production Deutschland GmbH shall pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim relief. |
| --- | --- |

2.

ExxonMobil Production Deutschland GmbH shall pay the costs, including those relating to the proceedings for interim relief.

---

(1)  OJ C 44, 8.2.2021.

---
Case 3:00-cv-00988-R Document 1 Filed 05/09/00 Page 1 of 3 PageID 1
Case 3:00-cv-00988-R Document 1 Filed 05/09/00 Page 2 of 3 PageID 2
Case 3:00-cv-00988-R Document 1 Filed 05/09/00 Page 3 of 3 PageID 3