alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021263EN.01002301.xml

| 5.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 263/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 263/23

---

Order of the General Court of 21 May 2021 — TrekStor v EUIPO — Yuneec Europe (Breeze)

(Case T-158/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Breeze - Earlier EU word mark Breeze - Relative ground for refusal - Comparison of the goods - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2021/C 263/31)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: TrekStor Ltd (Hong Kong, China) (represented by: O. Spieker, A. Schönfleisch, N. Willich and N. Achilles, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Söder, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Yuneec Europe GmbH (Kaltenkirchen, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 January 2020 (Case R 470/2020-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Yuneec Europe and TrekStor.

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | TrekStor Ltd is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

TrekStor Ltd is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.

---
Vanessa Arnold SHOOTS v. STATE

CR-16-0097

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

September 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6159

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LLOYD ANTHONIE WILLIAMS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of North Carolina, at Shelby. Lacy H. Thornburg, District

Judge. (CR-98-144)

Submitted: June 18, 2004 Decided: July 14, 2004

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lloyd Anthonie Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Lloyd Anthonie Williams seeks to appeal from the district

court’s order denying his motion to dismiss the indictment for lack

of jurisdiction. We remand to the district court for factual

determinations regarding whether Williams’ motions for default and

summary judgment can constitute a timely notice of appeal, Houston

v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988), and whether his motion to file

an appeal out of time meets the requirements to reopen the appeals

period. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). 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.

REMANDED
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


I, Denise Barton, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of American Casino &
Entertainment Properties LLC (the Registrant),
certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of
the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2004 of the Registrant (the
Report):



| |                                                                                                                                                                    
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of
    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
    1934, as amended; and                      
|
| | (2) The information contained in the Report fairly
    presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
    results of operations of the Registrant.



| |                  
| | -----------------
| | /s/ DENISE BARTON
| |                  



| |                                             
| | --------------------------------------------
| | Denise Barton                               
| | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial      
| | Officer, Treasurer and Secretary of American
| | Casino & Entertainment Properties LLC       

Date: December 1, 2004
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent

v. OMAR FRANCIS, Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : No. 188 EAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 14th day of August, 2014, the Petition for All owance of Appeal is DENIED
.
EXHIBIT 99.11



CONSENT OF MCDANIEL & ASSOCIATES CONSULTANTS LTD.



We hereby consent to the reference to us in this annual report on Form 40-F of Enterra Energy Trust and all other references to our name included or incorporated by reference in: (i) Enterra Energy Trusts annual report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 and (ii) the registration statement on Form F-3 (File Nos. 333-113609 and 333-115318) and the registration statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-120996), filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Securities Act of 1933, as amended as applicable.



Dated:  March 31, 2008

Calgary, Alberta

Signed B.J. Wurster

McDaniel & Associates Consultants Ltd.
# C_2021263EN.01002101.xml

| 5.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 263/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 263/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 May 2021 — Müller v EUIPO (TIER SHOP)

(Case T-535/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark TIER SHOP - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Interest in bringing proceedings - Obligation to state reasons - Article 72(4) and the first sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(2021/C 263/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Müller GmbH & Co. KG (Ulm, Germany) (represented by: S. Mühlberger, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 June 2020 (Case R 2600/2019-5), concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign TIER SHOP as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Müller GmbH & Co. KG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Müller GmbH & Co. KG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 348, 19.10.2020.

---
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 1179** 

MARION TURK CULBERSON , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. KELLY NICHOLS, in her official capacity and individually; ANDERSON COUNTY , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Anderson

. Timothy M. Cain , District Judge. ( 8:11

- cv - 01708

- TMC )

Submitted : October 31, 2012 Decided: December 10, 2012

Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Charles R. Griffin, Jr., THE GRIFFIN FIRM, L.L.C., Anderson, South Carolina, for Appellant. Stephanie H. Burton, GIBBES BURTON, LLC, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellee s .
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Marion Turk Culberson appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 ) complaint and dismissing with out prejudice his state law claims of malicious prosecutio n, abuse of process, outrageous conduct, and negligence . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. Culberson v. Nichols , No. 8:11

- cv - 01708

- TMC (D.S.C. Jan. 11, 2012)

. 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
DRONE Law Enforcement Response

Detect all available elements of the situation; attempt to locate and identify individuals operating the drone. 

(Look at windows/balconies/roof tops).

Report incident to the FAA Regional Operations Center (ROC). Follow-up assistance can be obtained 

through FAA Law Enforcement Assistance Program (LEAP) special agents. 

Observe the UAS and maintain visibility of the device; look for damage or injured individuals. Note: Battery 

life is typically 20 to 30 minutes. 

Notice features: Identify the type of device (fixed-wing/multi-rotor), its size, shape, color, payload 

(i.e., video equipment), and activity of device. 

Execute appropriate police action: Maintain a safe environment for general public and first responders. 

Conduct a field interview and document ALL details of the event per the guidance provided by the FAA. 

faa.gov/uas/resources/law_enforcement/

Always follow agency policies: Take appropriate action based on the facts and circumstances of the incident 

and site/area specific laws and rules. The FAA’s enforcement action does NOT impact ANY enforcement 

action(s) taken by law enforcement.

Local ordinances that may apply include, but are not limited to: Reckless endangerment, criminal 

mischief, voyeurism, inciting violence.
Western ROC AK, AZ, CA, CO, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, 

UT, WA, WY

206-231-2089 9-WSA-OPSCTR@faa.gov

Central ROC AR, IA, IL, IN, KS, LA, Ml, MN, MO, ND, 

NE, NM, OH, OK, SD, TX, WI

817-222-5006 9-CSA-ROC@faa.gov

East ROC AL, CT, FL, GA, KY, MA, ME, MS, NC, NH, 

PR, RI, SC, TN, VI, VT 

DC, DE, MD, NJ, NY, PA, VA, WV

404-305-5180

404-305-5150

9-ESA-R0C@faa.gov

9-ESA-R0C@faa.gov

FAA Drone Incident Reporting

Document and provide the following information to FAA: 

• Identity of operators and witnesses (name, contact information) 

• Type of operation (hobby, commercial, public/governmental)

• Type of device(s) and registration information (number/certificate)

• Event location and incident details (date, time, place)

• Evidence collection (photos, video, device confiscation)

Contact your FAA LEAP agent or an FAA ROC for assistance:
Nathan Deane BENSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2459

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 21, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Federal Aviation

Holistic View of Administration

FAA Research & 

Development
Federal Aviation

Administration

2

Key R&D Questions

• Is the FAA R&D investment right-sized and costeffective? 

• What are the benefits and sequencing for R&D 

related to NextGen?

• What R&D is needed for UAS integration into the 

NAS?

• What R&D is needed for commercial space/NAS 

integration?

• How does FAA R&D influence global leadership?

• What are the current and strategic R&D personnel 

needs?
Walter MARTINEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-2601

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 1, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# C_2020320EN.01000501.xml

| 28.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 320/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 320/5

---

Appeal brought on 8 April 2020 by WV against the order of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) made on 29 January 2020 in Case T-43/19, WV v EEAS

(Case C-171/20 P)

(2020/C 320/06)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: WV (represented by: É. Boigelot, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European External Action Service (EEAS)

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | Set aside the order of 29 January 2020 of the General Court of the European Union in Case T-43/19, in so far as it dismissed the action as inadmissible and ordered the present appellant to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside the order of 29 January 2020 of the General Court of the European Union in Case T-43/19, in so far as it dismissed the action as inadmissible and ordered the present appellant to pay the costs;

| — | Order the original defendant to pay all of the costs, including the costs incurred before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with Article 184 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the original defendant to pay all of the costs, including the costs incurred before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with Article 184 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Union;

| — | Refer the case back to the General Court of the European Union in order for it to rule on the action. |
| --- | --- |

—

Refer the case back to the General Court of the European Union in order for it to rule on the action.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The appellant submits that, in issuing the order under appeal, the General Court failed to have regard to the principle of unfettered evaluation of evidence and the concept of a body of consistent evidence and, therefore, failed to have regard to the rules relating to the burden of proof, in particular as regards the arguments and evidence submitted concerning the legal nature of the claim for damages lodged by the appellant with the EEAS pursuant to Article 90 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union.

The single ground of appeal raised by the appellant also alleges discrimination, distortion of the facts by the order under appeal and manifest errors of assessment made by the General Court resulting in imprecise legal reasoning.

---
Order entered December 23, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-01073-CV

IN RE RENT SPACE MGMT LLC, Relator

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-21-04670-A

ORDER

Before Justices Myers, Partida-Kipness, and Carlyle

Before the Court is relator’s December 9, 2021 petition for writ of 

mandamus. We request that real party in interest and respondent file a response, if 

any, to the petition for writ of mandamus by January 5, 2022. 

/s/ ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS

JUSTICE
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 Cygni Investments, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned principal executive officer and principal
financial officer of the Company, 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 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.

Date:  August 21, 2006

/s/ Carl Suter
Carl Suter, President and Treasurer
(Principal executive officer
and principal financial officer)
STATE of Louisiana v. Dalando GARNER

NO. 2018-KO-1290

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 25, 2019

Denied.
Order entered June 28 , 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 17 - 00990 - CR No. 05 - 17 - 00991 - CR No. 05 - 17 - 00992 - CR GERARD MONTRELL PERR Y, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEX AS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F16 - 11984 - K , F16 - 11985 - K, F16 - 11986 - K 

### O RDER Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we GRANT the December 24, 2017 m otion of Valencia Bush for l eave to withdraw as appointed counsel on appeal. We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to remove Valencia Bush as counsel of record for appellant. We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order and all future correspondence to Gerard Montrell P erry, TDCJ No. 02153962, Denton County Jail, 127 N. Woodrow Lane, No. 300, Denton, Texas, 76205.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
# C_2021329EN.01002501.xml

| 16.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/25

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 July 2021 — Pshonka v Council

(Case T-269/20) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken having regard to the situation in Ukraine - Freezing of funds - List of the persons, entities and bodies covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources - Maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list - Council’s obligation to verify that the decision of an authority of a third State respected the rights of the defence and the right to effective judicial protection)

(2021/C 329/32)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Viktor Pavlovych Pshonka (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: M. Mleziva, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: R. Pekař and P. Mahnič, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/373 of 5 March 2020 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2020 L 71, p. 10), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/370 of 5 March 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine (OJ 2020 L 71, p. 1), in so far as those acts maintain the applicant’s name on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/373 of 5 March 2020 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/370 of 5 March 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as the name of Mr Viktor Pavlovych Pshonka was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/373 of 5 March 2020 amending Decision 2014/119/CFSP concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/370 of 5 March 2020 implementing Regulation (EU) No 208/2014 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Ukraine, in so far as the name of Mr Viktor Pavlovych Pshonka was maintained on the list of persons, entities and bodies subject to those restrictive measures;

| 2. | Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 222, 6.7.2020.

---
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 238 

Expressing support for recognizing September 20 as National Service Dog 

Day. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 6, 2023 

Mr. TESTER (for himself and Mr. MORAN) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for recognizing September 20 as National 

Service Dog Day. 

Whereas service dogs assist individuals with a wide range of 

challenges, including— 

(1) post-traumatic stress disorder; 

(2) traumatic brain injury; 

(3) military sexual trauma; 

(4) epilepsy; 

(5) visual, hearing, and mobility impairments; and 

(6) other disabilities; 

Whereas service dogs are able to support veterans struggling 

after war, hear for individuals who are deaf, see for individuals who are blind, and even sense changes in an individual’s body before a seizure; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 238 IS 

Whereas service dogs have assisted individuals in the United 

States since 1929; 

Whereas service dogs were legally recognized by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et 

seq.) to do work or perform tasks for an individual with 

a disability and have protections under the Fair Housing 

Act (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) and 41705 of title 49, 

United States Code (commonly known as the ‘‘Air Carrier Access Act of 1986’’); 

Whereas evidence-based research has shown that service dogs 

provide numerous health and fitness benefits, including 

enhanced mobility and independence and a reduction in 

the symptoms of depression, anxiety, stress, and suicidal 

ideation; 

Whereas tens of thousands of service dogs are estimated to 

be working in the United States today, located in all 50 

States, Puerto Rico, and Guam; and 

Whereas National Service Dog Day is an appropriate tribute 

to service dogs and the organizations that offer service 

dogs free of charge to United States veterans and individuals with disabilities: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) supports recognizing September 20 as Na3 tional Service Dog Day; 

4 (2) encourages all individuals in the United 

5 States to learn about the history of service dogs and 

6 the unique, positive impact service dogs have on in7 dividuals with disabilities; and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 238 IS 

1 (3) requests that the President issue a procla2 mation calling on the people of the United States to 

3 conduct appropriate ceremonies, activities, and pro4 grams to demonstrate support for organizations that 

5 train and pair service dogs with disabled individuals 

6 in the United States. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS