alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* P ursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5 TH C IR

. R.

47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 97-30746

Summary Calendar

_____________________

JOSEPH CHARGOIS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

FAIR GROUNDS CORPORATION ET AL.,

Defendants,

FAIR GROUNDS CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CV-4195

October 5, 1998

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Joseph Chargois appeals the judgment, following a bench trial,

in favor of the Fair Grounds Corporation on his Age Discrimination

in Employment Act (ADEA) claim, 29 U.S.C. § 623(a)(1). Chargois

contends that he produced direct evidence of age dis crimination,

pointing to evidence that Lt. Jame s called him “old man”. He

maintains that, because he produced direct evidence of age b ias,- 2 -

the district court should have applied the mixed motives analysis

of Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins

, 490 U.S. 228 (1989), rather than

the McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green , 411 U.S. 792 (1973) pretext

analysis.

In Brown v. CSG Logic, Inc.

, 82 F.3d 651, 656 (5th Cir. 1996),

an ADEA age discrimination case, the plaintiff was called an “old

goat” and told “you just can’t remember, you’re getting too old”.

However, our court did not find this to be direct evidence of

discrimination, but rather found that “the comments imply”

discrimination. I d. at 656-57. Then, although it did not mention

McDonnell Douglas

, the court used a similar analysis. Here, James

referred to Chargois as an “old man” and told him “you don’t need

this job”. Like the evidence in B rown

, these statements only imply

that James was discriminating against Chargois, but do not provide

direct evidence of discrimination. Accordingly, the district court

was correct in applying the McDonnell Douglas analysis.

The appropriate question after a trial on the merits in an

ADEA case, as enunciated in H azen Paper Co. v. Biggins , 507 U.S.

604, 610 (1993), is whether age actually played a role in, and had

a determinative influence on, the employer’s decision-making

process. A rmendariz v. Pinkerton Tobacco Co.

, 58 F.3d 144, 149

(5th Cir. 1995). The district court’s finding that “the Fair

Grounds has a history of hiring older workers”; that “there is

[not] a climate of age discrimination at the Fair Grounds”; that

Chargois “was not terminated due to his age”; and that Chargois had

not shown that termination for insubordination was not the true- 3 -

reason are sufficient findings that age did not have a

determinative influence on the decision to terminate him. Chargois

does not contend that these findings are clearly erroneous. S ee

Anderson v. City of Bessemer City

, 470 U.S. 564, 573-74 (1985);

Odom v. Frank , 3 F.3d 839, 843 (5th Cir. 1993).

AFFIRMED
Case 3:03-cv-02761-K Document 144 Filed 01/04/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:03-cv-02761-K Document 144 Filed 01/04/2008 Page 2 of 2
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 6 (Friday, January 10, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 2006]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00341]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-1262]

Notice of Approval of Product Under Voucher: Rare Pediatric 
Disease Priority Review Voucher; ALYFTREK (vanzacaftor, tezacaftor, and 
deutivacaftor)

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the 
issuance of approval of a product redeeming a priority review voucher. 
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) authorizes FDA to 
award priority review vouchers to sponsors of approved rare pediatric 
disease product applications that meet certain criteria. FDA is 
required to publish notice of the issuance of priority review vouchers 
as well as the approval of products redeeming a priority review 
voucher. FDA has determined that the application for ALYFTREK 
(vanzacaftor, tezacaftor, and deutivacaftor), approved December 20, 
2024, meets the criteria for redeeming a priority review voucher.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathryn Lee, Center for Drug 
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New 
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-1394.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is announcing the approval of a product 
redeeming a rare pediatric disease priority review voucher. Under 
section 529 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360ff), FDA will report the 
issuance of rare pediatric disease priority review vouchers and the 
approval of products for which a voucher was redeemed. FDA has 
determined that the application for ALYFTREK (vanzacaftor, tezacaftor, 
and deutivacaftor) tablets meets the redemption criteria.
    For further information about the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority 
Review Voucher Program and for a link to the full text of section 529 
of the FD&C Act, go to https://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/DevelopingProductsforRareDiseasesConditions/RarePediatricDiseasePriorityVoucherProgram/default.htm. For further 
information about ALYFTREK (vanzacaftor, tezacaftor, and 
deutivacaftor), go to the ``Drugs@FDA'' website at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/.

    Dated: January 3, 2025.
P. Ritu Nalubola,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2025-00341 Filed 1-8-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
```
**EXHIBIT 12.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Christophe Hidalgo, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of COMPANHIA BRASILEIRA DE DISTRIBUIÇÃO; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this report fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The company’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have: 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; 

c) evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on evaluation; and 

d) disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and to the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: April 29, 2015

By: /s/ Christophe Hidalgo
<PAGE>


                                  AGREEMENT


     FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, Donald J. Larson hereby agrees to vote all
shares now or hereafter owned by him in Concentra Managed Care, Inc. in favor
of election of Lois E. Silverman, or in the event of her death a member of
her family designated by her estate, or a designee of Ms. Silverman or her
estate, reasonably acceptable to the Board of Concentra, as a Director of
Concentra Managed Care, Inc. This Agreement shall continue for so long as
Lois E. Silverman, her estate, or any member of her immediate family or any
trust of which she or any member of her immediate family is a beneficiary or
trustee, shall own at least 519,113 shares of Concentra Managed Care, Inc.

     Executed as of May 15, 1997.


                                      /s/ Donald J. Larson
                                      -------------------------------
                                      Donald J. Larson
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.
 Department of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
 Docket Nos.AES Pike County Energy Storage, LLC
EG25-1-000BCE Seal Beach, LLC
EG25-2-000Wheatsborough Solar, LLC
EG25-3-000Pluto Energy Storage, LLC
EG25-4-000Kola Energy Storage, LLC
EG25-5-000Jackson Fuller Energy Storage, LLC
EG25-6-000NRG THW GT LLC
EG25-7-000Morris Solar, LLC
EG25-8-000Milford Gen Lead, LLC
EG25-9-000Illinois Winds LLC
EG2510-000Hummingbird Energy Storage, LLC
EG25-11-000Azalea Springs Solar Park LLC
EG25-12-000Duff Solar Park LLC
EG25-13-000Pleasantville Solar Park LLC
EG25-14-000Riverstart Solar Park IV LLC
EG25-15-000Sandrini BESS Storage LLC
EG25-16-000Peregrine Energy Storage, LLC
EG25-17-000OneLNG Power LLC
EG25-18-000Kuna Bess LLC
EG25-19-000Westside Canal 2A, LLC
EG25-20-000IN Solar 1, LLC
EG25-21-000IEP Tejas Verde LLC
EG25-22-000New Hickory Solar LLC
EG25-23-000
 Take notice that during the month of December 2024, the status of the above-captioned entities as Exempt Wholesale Generators became effective by operation of the Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 366.7(a) (2024). Dated: January 2, 2025. Debbie-Anne A. Reese, Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2025-00233 Filed 1-7-25; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Case 2:03-cr-00054-J-BB Document 85 Filed 05/05/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 269
 

 Case 2:03-cr-00054-J-BB Document 85 Filed 05/05/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 270
# C_2019025EN.01001201.xml

| 21.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 22 November 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Dunajská Streda — Slovak Republic) — ZSE Energia a.s. v RG

(Case C-627/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 - European Small Claims Procedure - Articles 2(1) and 3(1) - Scope - Concept of ‘parties’ - Cross-border disputes))

(2019/C 25/14)

Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Okresný súd Dunajská Streda

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: ZSE Energia a.s.

Defendant: RG

intervener: ZSE Energia CZ, s.r.o.

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 establishing a European Small Claims Procedure, as amended by Council Regulation (EU) No 517/2013 of 13 May 2013, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘parties’ covers solely the applicant and the defendant in the main proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 establishing a European Small Claims Procedure, as amended by Council Regulation (EU) No 517/2013 of 13 May 2013, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘parties’ covers solely the applicant and the defendant in the main proceedings.

| 2. | Article 2(1) and Article 3(1) of Regulation No 861/2007, as amended by Regulation No 517/2013, must be interpreted as meaning that a dispute such as that in the main proceedings, in which the applicant and the defendant have their domicile or their habitual residence in the same Member State as the court or tribunal seised, does not come within the scope of that regulation. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 2(1) and Article 3(1) of Regulation No 861/2007, as amended by Regulation No 517/2013, must be interpreted as meaning that a dispute such as that in the main proceedings, in which the applicant and the defendant have their domicile or their habitual residence in the same Member State as the court or tribunal seised, does not come within the scope of that regulation.

---

(1)  OJ C 42, 5.2.2018.

---
# C_2021242EN.01004601.xml

| 21.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 242/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242/46

---

Order of the General Court of 23 April 2021 — Target Brands v EUIPO — The a.r.t. company b&s (art class)

(Case T-221/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Revocation of the contested decision - Disappearance of the subject matter of the proceedings - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 242/65)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Target Brands Inc. (Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States) (represented by: A. Norris, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: The a.r.t. company b&s, SA (Quel, Spain) (represented by: J. Villamor Muguerza, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2020 (Case R 1596/2019-5) relating to opposition proceedings between The a.r.t. company b&s and Target Brands.

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 Target Brands Inc. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Target Brands Inc.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.

---
STATE of Louisiana v. Kenneth KLEIN

NO. 2018-K-1569

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 15, 2019

*1126Denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 273 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 273

 To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to continue to implement 
       the Migrant Protection Protocols, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2025

   Mr. Gill of Texas (for himself, Ms. Mace, Mr. Ogles, Mr. Weber of 
 Texas, Mr. Burlison, Mr. Nehls, Mr. Cloud, Mr. Higgins of Louisiana, 
Ms. Malliotakis, Ms. Tenney, Mr. Wied, Mr. Moore of West Virginia, Ms. 
  Boebert, Mr. Arrington, Mr. Davidson, Mr. Crane, Mr. Crenshaw, Mr. 
Brecheen, Mr. Donalds, Mr. Self, Mr. Hudson, Mrs. Houchin, Mrs. Miller 
of Illinois, Mr. Mills, Mr. Palmer, Mr. Yakym, Mr. Rulli, Mr. Biggs of 
   Arizona, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Lawler, Mr. Messmer, Mr. Downing, Mr. 
 McGuire, Mr. Pfluger, Mr. Perry, Mr. Harris of Maryland, Ms. Hageman, 
Mr. Fry, Mr. Babin, Ms. Van Duyne, Mr. Balderson, Mr. Hern of Oklahoma, 
 Mr. Begich, Mr. Harris of North Carolina, Mr. Evans of Colorado, Mr. 
 Harrigan, Mr. Huizenga, Mr. Dunn of Florida, Mr. Finstad, Mr. Norman, 
 Mr. Smith of Missouri, Mr. Langworthy, Mr. Ellzey, Mr. Aderholt, Mr. 
Barrett, Mr. Gooden, Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, Mr. Bacon, Mr. Hamadeh of 
Arizona, Mr. Moran, Mr. Hunt, Mr. Guest, Mr. Bean of Florida, Ms. Foxx, 
 Ms. Greene of Georgia, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, Mr. 
 Bost, Mr. Zinke, Mr. Collins, Mr. Estes, Mr. Alford, Mr. Clyde, Mrs. 
    Luna, Mr. Bergman, Mr. Schmidt, Mr. Tony Gonzales of Texas, Mr. 
Fleischmann, Mr. Ciscomani, Mrs. Fischbach, Mr. McCaul, Mr. Moolenaar, 
Mr. Moore of Utah, Mr. Carter of Georgia, and Mr. McDowell) introduced 
    the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to continue to implement 
       the Migrant Protection Protocols, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Return Excessive Migrants and 
Asylees to International Neighbors in Mexico Act of 2025'' or the 
``REMAIN in Mexico Act of 2025''.

SEC. 2. MIGRANT PROTECTION PROTOCOLS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of 
Homeland Security shall implement the Migrant Protection Protocols in 
accordance with the memorandum of Secretary of Homeland Security 
Nielsen entitled ``Policy Guidance for Implementation of the Migrant 
Protection Protocols'', dated January 25, 2019.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2021242EN.01004502.xml

| 21.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 242/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242/45

---

Order of the General Court of 23 April 2021 — Target Brands v EUIPO — The a.r.t. company b&s (ART CLASS)

(Case T-202/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Revocation of the contested decision - Disappearance of the subject matter of the proceedings - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 242/64)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Target Brands Inc. (Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States) (represented by: A. Norris, Barrister)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO intervening before the General Court: The a.r.t. company b&s, SA (Quel, Spain) (represented by: J. Villamor Muguerza, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 January 2020 (Case R 1597/2019-5) relating to opposition proceedings between The a.r.t. company b&s and Target Brands.

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 Target Brands Inc. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Target Brands Inc.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 15.6.2020.

---
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# 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 7, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 30, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 580 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1030, K2025-1029.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00047 Filed 1-6-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P