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

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 3 (Monday, January 6, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 690]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31706]

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

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 1130 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-912, K2025-913.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-31706 Filed 1-3-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
# C_2018166EN.01001601.xml

| 14.5.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 166/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 166/16

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 15 March 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Piteşti — Romania) — SC Cali Esprou SRL v Administraţia Fondului pentru Mediu

(Case C-104/17) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 94/62/EC - Packaging and packaging waste - Recovery and recycling of waste - National environmental fund contribution - National marketing of packaged products and their packaging, without alteration - ‘Polluter-pays’ principle - Status of polluter))

(2018/C 166/20)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Piteşti

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SC Cali Esprou SRL

Applicant:

Defendant: Administraţia Fondului pentru Mediu

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15 of European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste and the ‘polluter-pays’ principle which it implements do not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposes a contribution on an economic operator which does not make any alteration to the packaging which it places on the market, calculated on the basis of the difference in weight between, on the one hand, the quantity of packaging waste corresponding to the minimum targets for energy recovery and recovery by recycling and the quantity of packaging waste actually recovered or recycled.

---

(1)  OJ C 168, 29.5.2017.

1

---
Nathaniel MIXON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-3691

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 6, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Latosha Latisha SPAULDING, DOC #Y15348, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-2009

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 22, 2019

Affirmed.
# C_2017121EN.01003402.xml

| 18.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/34

---

Order of the General Court of 9 February 2017 — Asolo v EUIPO — Red Bull (FLÜGEL)

(Case T-714/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Cancellation proceedings - Revocation of the contested decision - No need to adjudicate))

(2017/C 121/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Asolo LTD (Limassol, Cyprus) (represented by: W. Pors, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral and M. Capostagno, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Red Bull GmbH (Fuschl am See, Austria) (represented by: A. Renck, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 July 2016 (Case R 282/2015-5), relating to cancellation proceedings between Red Bull and Asolo.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Asolo LTD and Red Bull GmbH. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Asolo LTD and Red Bull GmbH.

---

(1)  OJ C 462, 12.12.2016.

1

---
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 40-F of Enterra Energy Trust for the period ended December 31, 2005 I, Keith Conrad, Chief Executive Officer of the issuer, certify that:

1.

The annual 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 annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.



|Date: August 24, 2006 | By: | Signed E. Keith Conrad
Keith Conrad
Chief Executive Officer
|--------------------- | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------



This certification accompanies the annual report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the issuer for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
# C_2018134EN.01001001.xml

| 16.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 21 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof, Germany) — Peugeot Deutschland GmbH v Deutsche Umwelthilfe eV

(Case C-132/17) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom to provide services - Directive 2010/13/EU - Definitions - Concept of ‘audiovisual media service’ - Scope - Channel available on YouTube for videos promoting new passenger car models))

(2018/C 134/13)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Peugeot Deutschland GmbH

Appellant:

Respondent: Deutsche Umwelthilfe eV

Respondent:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(1)(a) of Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services (the Audiovisual Media Services Directive) must be interpreted as meaning that the definition of ‘audiovisual media service’ covers neither a video channel, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, on which internet users can view short promotional videos for new passenger car models, nor a single video of that kind considered in isolation.

---

(1)  OJ C 213, 3.7.2017.

1

---
Exhibit 23

                        Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the reference to our firm in the following Registration Statements
on Form S-8
         No. 333-47165 pertaining to the Precision Tune Stock Option Plan
         No. 333-47167 pertaining to the Precision Tune 1996 Employee Stock
           Purchase Plan
         No. 333-47169 pertaining to the Precision Auto Care Employee Stock
           Option Plan
         No. 333-47171 pertaining to the Precision Auto Care, Inc. Director
           Stock Option Plan
         No. 333-49097 pertaining to the Precision Auto Care 1998 Employee Stock
           Purchase Plan

and of our report dated September 25, 1998, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedule of Precision Auto Care in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended June 30, 1998.


Vienna, Virginia                                             Ernst & Young LLP
October 12, 1998
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Part 73
          - [MB Docket No. 22-405; Report No. 3222; FR ID 271711]

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission.

# ACTION:

Petition for reconsideration.

# SUMMARY:

Petition for Reconsideration (Petition) has been filed in the Commission's proceeding by Robert McAllan, CEO, and Rich Morena, COO/CFO, on behalf of Press Communications, LLC.

# DATES:

Oppositions to the Petition must be filed on or before February 6, 2025. Replies to oppositions to the Petition must be filed on or before February 18, 2025.

# ADDRESSES:

 Federal Communications Commission, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Thomas Nessinger, Media Bureau, Audio Division, (202) 418-2700,                         *Thomas.Nessinger@fcc.gov;*                         or James Bradshaw, Media Bureau, Audio Division, (202) 418-2700,                         *James.Bradshaw@fcc.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This is a summary of the Commission's document, Report No. 3222, released December 30, 2024. The full text of this document can be accessed online via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System at:                     *http://apps.fcc.gov/​ecfs/​.*                     The Commission will not send a Congressional Review Act (CRA) submission to Congress or the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because no rules are being adopted by the Commission.                

*Subject:*                     Modifying Rules for FM Terrestrial Digital Audio Broadcasting Systems, MB Docket No. 22-405, First Report and Order, FCC 24-105, published at 89 FR 84096 on October 21, 2024.                

*Number of Petitions Filed:*                     1.                

Federal Communications Commission.

Marlene Dortch,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2025-00493 Filed 1-21-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
EXHIBIT 8.1


                              SUBSIDIARIES OF EXFO




NAME                                                    JURISDICTION
----                                                    ------------
EXFO UK Limited                                         United Kingdom

EXFO Photonic Solutions Inc.                            Ontario, Canada

GEXFO Distribution Internationale Inc.                  Quebec, Canada

GAP Optique SA                                          Switzerland

EXFO Asia Pacific PTE Ltd.                              Singapore

Nortech Fibronic Inc.                                   Canada

EXFO Protocol Inc.                                      Canada

EXFO Europe SARL                                        France

EXFO International Services Management LLC              Hungary

EXFO USA Inc.                                           Delaware

EXFO America Inc.                                       Delaware

Burleigh Instruments, Inc.                              New York

Burleigh Instruments (UK) Ltd.                          United Kingdom

Burleigh Instruments GmbH                               Germany

Burleigh Automation Inc.                                Delaware
Robert A. GELSEY, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-3664

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 27, 2019 Rehearing Denied April 09, 2019

Robert A. Gelsey, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

Upon consideration of Petitioner's response filed on December 26, 2018, this case is hereby dismissed.

Rowe, Bilbrey, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.
STATE of Louisiana v. Samuel J. BARKER, Jr.

NO. 2018-KO-0968

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 18, 2019

Denied.
Case 3:04-cr-00 fs Document 201 Filed 11/258 Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) CRIMINAL ACTION NO.
VS. )
) 3:04-CR-191-G
LESTER JON RUSTON, )
)
Defendant. )
ORDER

After making the review required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), the court finds that
the findings, conclusions and recommendation of the magistrate judge are correct,
and they are ADOPTED as the findings and conclusions of the court.

SO ORDERED.

November 25, 2008.

Que Faabe

Senior United States District Judge
Case 3:03-cv-01700-R Document 8 Filed 04/04/05 Page 1 of 6 PageID 26
 

 Case 3:03-cv-01700-R Document 8 Filed 04/04/05 Page 2 of 6 PageID 27
 

 Case 3:03-cv-01700-R Document 8 Filed 04/04/05 Page 3 of 6 PageID 28
 

 Case 3:03-cv-01700-R Document 8 Filed 04/04/05 Page 4 of 6 PageID 29
 

 Case 3:03-cv-01700-R Document 8 Filed 04/04/05 Page 5 of 6 PageID 30
 

 Case 3:03-cv-01700-R Document 8 Filed 04/04/05 Page 6 of 6 PageID 31
Case 3:04-cv-00981-P Document 22 Filed 07/05/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 148
STATE of Louisiana v. Justin Lamar FOOTS

NO. 2019-KH-0021

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 18, 2019

Denied. Untimely filed pursuant to La.S.Ct.R. X § 5.
Case 3:04-cv-00139-M Document 48 Filed 06/20/05 Page 1 of 3 PageID 321
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00139-M Document 48 Filed 06/20/05 Page 2 of 3 PageID 322
 

 Case 3:04-cv-00139-M Document 48 Filed 06/20/05 Page 3 of 3 PageID 323
Exhibit 32.1





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 China Sun Group High-Tech Co. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended November 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Guosheng Fu, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.





Date: January 13, 2011





/s/ Guosheng FuGuosheng Fu, Principal Executive Officer
OFFICE OF THE STANDING CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE

6851 N.E. LOOP 820, SUITE 300

NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS 76180-6608

(817) 770-8500

FAX (817) 770-8508

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

In Re: Case No: 23-43558-MXM

WAEL SAMIR FALTS

Debtor

NOTICE OF FILING OF FINAL REPORT AND ACCOUNT BY TRUSTEE

Notice is hereby given pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 350 and Bankruptcy Rule 5009 that Tim Truman, Chapter 13 

Trustee, has filed a Final Report and Account in the above styled and numbered case certifying that the estate 

has been fully administered. The Final Report and Account is on file with the CLERK OF THE 

BANKRUPTCY COURT, 128 U.S. Courthouse, 10th and Lamar Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102-3643 and is 

available for review. A summary of the report is as follows:

Total Receipts

Administrative Disbursements *

Debtor Refund Disbursements

Secured Disbursements

Priority Disbursements

Unsecured Disbursements

* Includes Attorney Fees, Notice Fees, Trustee Fees and Clerk's Fees

Total Disbursements

$1,800.00 

$1,800.00 

$0.00 

$0.00 

$0.00 

$0.00 

$1,800.00

Notice is further given that unless an objection is filed by the United States Trustee or a party in interest within 

30 days of service of this notice, the Court may declare that the bankruptcy estate has been fully administered, 

and that the Trustee should be discharged and further liability on said Trustee's bond with respect to this case 

can be terminated.

 /s/ Tim Truman

Tim Truman, Standing Chapter 13 Trustee

September 12, 2024

Case 23-43558-mxm13 Doc 70 Filed 09/12/24 Entered 09/12/24 10:44:11 Desc

Page 1 of 1
**OFFICE OF**  **THE All-ORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 

Bmtoreble John Ii. Red, Commlrcioasr B-mu 0r labor Statistica Au8tl.n,Te=as Dear Stir

Youbars 

### requeste at to prepwe 8 form ror 8ubpoeM to ubor Statietias matter8 related t form la enalomd herenloa of thle dep8rtmnt **aa** for rerving such **rubpoenas** at fun& svallable to **the** Bureau

required of the said bureau,
. . . .” kndkrtlcle 5150, **Vemon*ts** Revleed Civil Statutes, coatalae a similar povlaloa.

Theourrent biennial opproprl&~~ion to G&eBweau of Labor Statistlae (s. 9. No. 332, hats 08th ~gialature, Reg.Honorable JohnD. Reed, pege 2

Seas., Ch. 400, p. 958) contalna the folloulng lten of appropriation from the General Rev6nUe Fund:

‘For the Years “BegInning “September 1, Emliag 1943 August 31,

1945 It

. . . . '15. 33quipment,Statloncry, Printing, Postage, orrice Supplies, Telephone, Telesxwph, Bxpre.8 andContlngent Expense.........$3,000.00 $3,000.00' It appears that the Lcgfrlaturs, lu makq this approprlation, hadla contemplation the uee of the tern ocmtlngent expense” ln the sense oi general items of expanse not provided for 8pa0m0rliy. State v. Ktitz, 144H. E. 120, 124; 110Ohio State 332. See also OUTOpinion No. O-1332. Theoocltr of procurlag aervloe of subpoenas comeulthln this da88 of expenses.

It 1s therefore the opinion of thla departasnt that the fear of peace orfloars for sarviqt Irubpoenarfor the Bureau of Labor Statistics my be pid out of raid oontirrgsnt fund. Yours very truly

WRArdb ATTORREY OBHSRAL

OFTEXAS By &. fl- QJ-LU. R.Allen Assistant Enclosure
# C_2016090EN.01002601.xml

| 7.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 90/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 90/26

---

Action brought on 18 January 2016 — DMC v OHIM — Etike’ International (De Giusti Orgoglio)

(Case T-18/16)

(2016/C 090/35)

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: DMC Srl (San Vendemiano, Italy) (represented by: B. Osti, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Etike’ International Srl (Baronissi, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘De Giusti Orgoglio’ — Application for registration No 9 499 468

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition procedure

Procedure before OHIM:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 November 2015 in Case R 1764/2013-5

Contested decision:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | alter the contested decision on the ground that it is unfounded in fact and law; |
| --- | --- |

—

alter the contested decision on the ground that it is unfounded in fact and law;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs;

| — | order the production of the files relating to the opposition proceedings No B 001757973 and Case R 1764/2013-5. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the production of the files relating to the opposition proceedings No B 001757973 and Case R 1764/2013-5.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

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

—

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

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

—

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

---
# C_2018134EN.01001102.xml

| 16.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 22 February 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Varna — Bulgaria) — Mitnitsa Varna v SAKSA ООD

(Case C-185/17) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common Customs Tariff - Classification of goods - Harmonised European standard EN 590:2013 - Subheading 2710 19 43 of the Combined Nomenclature - Relevant criteria for the classification of goods as gas oil))

(2018/C 134/15)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Referring court

Administrativen sad — Varna

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Mitnitsa Varna

Appellant:

Respondent: SAKSA ООD

Respondent:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Combined Nomenclature contained in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, in the version resulting from Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1101/2014 of 16 October 2014 must be interpreted as meaning that a mineral oil, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, may not, on account of its distillation characteristics, be classified as gas oil under subheading 2710 19 43 of that nomenclature, even when that oil meets the requirements referred to in harmonised standard EN 590:2013, in the version of the month of September 2013, relating to gas oil for arctic or severe winter climates.

---

(1)  OJ C 213, 3.7.2017.

1

---