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

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 98 

Declaring March 8, 2023, as ‘‘National Emily Warner & Women Airline 

Pilots Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 8, 2023 

Mr. HICKENLOOPER (for himself and Mr. BENNET) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Declaring March 8, 2023, as ‘‘National Emily Warner & 

Women Airline Pilots Day’’. 

Whereas Emily Howell Warner (referred to in this preamble 

as ‘‘Emily Warner’’) of the State of Colorado is a celebrated female airline pilot with a proud legacy of promoting gender equality in all professions; 

Whereas, 50 years ago, Emily Warner shattered the glass 

ceiling of the airline flight deck in the United States 

when she was hired by Frontier Airlines to be the first 

modern female airline pilot, opening the sky for other female airline pilots; 

Whereas, in 1974, Emily Warner became the first female 

member of the Air Line Pilots Association, International; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•SRES 98 IS 

Whereas, in 1976, Emily Warner became first female airline 

captain in the United States; 

Whereas Emily Warner was a founding member of— 

(1) the Colorado Pilots Association; 

(2) the International Society of Women Airline Pilots; and 

(3) the Friends of the Granby/Grand County Airport; 

Whereas the Frontier Airlines uniform worn by Emily Warner hangs in the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum; 

Whereas, in 1994, Emily Warner was honored by Colorado 

Legislature Resolution 94–29, entitled ‘‘Honoring Captain Emily Warner of the Achievements in Aviation History’’; 

Whereas Emily Warner has been inducted into the Women in 

Aviation International Pioneer Hall of Fame, the National Women’s Hall of Fame, the National Aviation Hall 

of Fame, the Irish-American Hall of Fame, the Colorado 

Women’s Hall of Fame, and the Colorado Aviation Hall 

of Fame; 

Whereas, in 2015, the Granby/Grand County Airport was renamed Emily Warner Field to honor the many contributions of Emily Warner to aviation; 

Whereas roughly 6 percent of airline pilots in the United 

States are women; and 

Whereas honoring the legacy of Emily Warner of breaking 

barriers for women in aviation requires continued dedication and commitments to ensuring greater representation 

of women in the airline pilot workforce and in all aviation 

careers: Now, therefore, be it 

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•SRES 98 IS 

1 Resolved, That the Senate does hereby declare March 

2 8, 2023, as ‘‘National Emily Warner & Women Airline Pi3 lots Day’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
STATE of Louisiana v. Steve BROCKINGTON

No. 2018-KP-1664

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 8, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF EVANGELINE**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. The application was not timely filed in the district court, and applicant fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Applicant has now fully litigated two applications for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Applicant's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state *59collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
# C_2021471EN.01004802.xml

| 22.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 471/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 471/48

---

Judgment of the General Court of 22 September 2021 — Asian Gear v EUIPO — Multimox (Scooter)

(Case T-686/20) (1)

(Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered community design representing a scooter - Earlier design - Ground for invalidity - Disclosure of the earlier design - Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)

(2021/C 471/68)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Asian Gear BV (Pijnacker, Netherlands) (represented by: B. Gravendeel, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Multimox Holding BV (Rijen, Netherlands) (represented by: J. Schmidt, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 September 2020 (Case R 1043/2018-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between Asian Gear and Multimox Holding.

Operative part of the judgment

The General Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Asian Gear BV to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Multimox Holding BV for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Asian Gear BV to pay the costs, including the costs necessarily incurred by Multimox Holding BV for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 35, 1.2.2021.

---
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 7 (Monday, January 13, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2708-2709]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00432]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

Statement of Delegation of Authority

    Notice is hereby given that I have delegated to the Director, 
National Institutes of Health (NIH), the authority vested in the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services under the Dr. Emmanuel Bilirakis 
and Honorable Jennifer Wexton National Plan to End Parkinson's Act 
(Pub. L. 118-66) (Act). The Act amends Title III of the Public Health 
Service Act by adding section 399OO, 42 U.S.C. 280n. The Act directs 
the Secretary to carry out a national project to prevent, diagnose, 
treat, and cure Parkinson's, to be known as the National Parkinson's 
Project, including

[[Page 2709]]

a requirement to establish and maintain an Advisory Council on 
Parkinson's Research, Care, and Services and to create, maintain, and 
periodically update a national plan to prevent, diagnose, treat, and 
cure Parkinson's, ameliorate symptoms, and slow or stop progression.
    This authority may be redelegated. Exercise of this authority shall 
be in accordance with established policies, procedures, guidelines, and 
regulations as prescribed by the Secretary. The Secretary retains the 
authority to submit reports to Congress, promulgate regulations, and 
appoint members to the Advisory Council on Parkinson's Research, Care, 
and Services. This Advisory Council will be co-chaired by the National 
Institutes of Health and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Health. This delegation is effective immediately.

    Dated: January 6, 2025.
Xavier Becerra,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2025-00432 Filed 1-7-25; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
STATE of Louisiana v. Kevin WOOD

NO. 2019-CI-0330

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 15, 2019

WRIT NOT CONSIDERED. Petitioner has not demonstrated that he sought review in the court(s) below before filing in this Court nor shown the "extraordinary circumstances" that would justify bypassing that level of review. La.S.Ct.R. X § 5(b)
Case 4:05-cv-00075-Y Document 17 Filed 02/16/05 Page 1 of 3 PageID 612
Case 4:05-cv-00075-Y Document 17 Filed 02/16/05 Page 2 of 3 PageID 613
Case 4:05-cv-00075-Y Document 17 Filed 02/16/05 Page 3 of 3 PageID 614
EX PARTE Danny L. SMITH

1160750 (CR-16-0417)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 7, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**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 United Energy Corp. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James McKeever,
      Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.


Dated:August
              14, 2007
            By:
            /s/
              James McKeeverJames
                McKeeverInterim
                Chief Financial Officer
# C_2022198EN.01004801.xml

| 16.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 198/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 198/48

---

Order of the General Court of 9 March 2022 — Kirimova v EUIPO

(Case T-727/20) (1)

(Action for annulment - Representation by a lawyer who is not an independent third party with regard to the applicant - Inadmissibility)

(2022/C 198/69)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Nigar Kirimova (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Parassina and A. García López, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: G. Predonzani and A. Söder, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision of the Executive Director of EUIPO of 30 September 2020 rejecting the applicant’s request for an exemption from the requirement to be a national of one of the Member States of the European Economic Area (EEA) upon which inclusion on the list of professional representatives authorised by that office depends.

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Ms Nigar Kirimova is ordered to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Ms Nigar Kirimova is ordered to bear her own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 163, 3.5.2021.

---
Exhibit 32 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 Amended Quarterly Report of LYFE Communications, Inc., (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert A. Bryson, President and acting CFO of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:  (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 result of operations of the Company.   Date:May 19, 2010By:/s/Robert A. BrysonRobert A. Bryson, President and acting CFO
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT




CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)




In connection with the Annual Report of Cornerstone Bancshares, Inc., a Tennessee corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), each of Nathaniel F. Hughes, President of the Company, and Gary W. Petty, Jr., Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to his 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 result of operations of the Company.




/s/  Nathaniel F. HughesNathaniel F. HughesPresident(principal executive officer)




/s/  Gary W. Petty, Jr.Gary W. Petty, Jr.Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(principal financial officer and accounting officer)




[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Cornerstone Bancshares, Inc. and will be retained by Cornerstone Bancshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HENRY C. QUAN; et al.,

 Plaintiffs - Appellants,

 v.

CITY OF LOS ANGELES,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 14-55185

D.C. No. 2:03-cv-02190-GAFAJWX

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Gary A. Feess, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted February 5, 2016

Pasadena, California

Before: REINHARDT, PAEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Henry Quan, Angela Chu, Thomas Danzek, and O’Neil Carter (“Plaintiffs”)

appeal the district court’s order dismissing their case with prejudice for lack of

prosecution. We affirm.

FILED

FEB 12 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The district court did not abuse its discretion by terminating Plaintiffs' case

for lack of prosecution eleven years after it was first filed in 2003. See Malone v.

U.S. Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987). The court properly applied

the Ninth Circuit’s five-factor test for determining whether to dismiss a case for

lack of prosecution. In re Eisen, 31 F.3d 1447, 1451 (9th Cir. 1994). Most

importantly, the court found that the actions of Plaintiffs’ counsel harmed “the

public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation” and interfered with “the

court’s need to manage its docket.” Id. 

Plaintiffs’ counsel first filed an ex parte request for a continuance of the

November 19, 2013 trial date because of health issues on October 10, 2013. The

court granted that request and continued the trial to January 28, 2014, but expressly

warned that any future continuance requests would be denied. The court instructed

Plaintiffs’ attorney to find substitute counsel if his health prevented him from

trying the case: “Let me be clear . . . . If this case doesn’t go to trial on the 28th of

January, if somebody isn’t here to answer ready, I will dismiss the case for lack of

prosecution, period.” Despite this warning, on December 20, 2013, Plaintiffs’

counsel made a second ex parte request to continue the trial to February 18, 2014,

citing continuing health problems. Yet Plaintiffs’ counsel acknowledged that

substitute counsel was not actually available on January 28 or on February 18,

2
2014. Given that Plaintiffs’ counsel ignored the district court’s clear warnings

regarding future continuances, the district court’s decision to dismiss Plaintiffs’

case was not surprising

Under the circumstances and in light of the district court’s intimate

familiarity with the history of the case, the district court did not abuse its discretion

in dismissing Plaintiffs’ case for lack of prosecution.

AFFIRMED.

3
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 24 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 24

  Condemning the commutation of the death sentence of Anthony George 
        Battle granted by President Biden on December 23, 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 14, 2025

 Mr. Cotton submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                     the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Condemning the commutation of the death sentence of Anthony George 
        Battle granted by President Biden on December 23, 2024.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING THE COMMUTATION OF THE DEATH 
              SENTENCE OF ANTHONY GEORGE BATTLE GRANTED BY PRESIDENT 
              BIDEN ON DECEMBER 23, 2024.

    It is the sense of the Senate that--
            (1) President Joseph R. Biden undermined the rule of law 
        and robbed victims of justice when he commuted the death 
        sentence of Anthony George Battle on December 23, 2024;
            (2) Anthony Battle was convicted of murdering his wife, a 
        U.S. Marine, and sentenced to life imprisonment;
            (3) while Battle was serving his life sentence at Atlanta 
        Federal Penitentiary, he murdered a 31-year-old correctional 
        officer named D'Antonio Washington by bludgeoning Washington in 
        the back of the head repeatedly with a ball-peen hammer;
            (4) when Battle was questioned by investigators, he had no 
        remorse and stated that he was ``happy'' he killed Washington;
            (5) this commutation is a reprehensible insult to the 
        victims of Anthony Battle;
            (6) President Biden claimed that he commuted the death 
        sentences of Anthony Battle and 36 other murderers out of a 
        principled opposition to the death penalty but refused to 
        commute the death sentences of the 3 most controversial death 
        row inmates, demonstrating that President Biden was motivated 
        by politics, not principles; and
            (7) the Senate unequivocally condemns this commutation.
                                 <all>
```
Antwan E. SCOTT v. STATE

CR-16-1093

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Donald BISHOP v. STATE

CR-16-1154

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Case 3:00-cv-02377-N Document 12 Filed 01/20/01 Page 1 of 1 PageID 14
Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 1 of 12 PageID 684
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 2 of 12 PageID 685
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 3 of 12 PageID 686
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 4 of 12 PageID 687
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 5 of 12 PageID 688
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 6 of 12 PageID 689
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 7 of 12 PageID 690
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 8 of 12 PageID 691
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 9 of 12 PageID 692
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 10 of 12 PageID 693
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 11 of 12 PageID 694
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02123-P Document 31 Filed 02/01/06 Page 12 of 12 PageID 695
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 10 (Thursday, January 16, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 4809]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00908]

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

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 16, 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 
January 8, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1265 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-1084, K2025-1083.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2025-00908 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
# C_2017006EN.01005401.xml

| 9.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/54

---

Action brought on 9 November 2016 — Krasnyiy oktyabr v EUIPO — Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ (CRABS)

(Case T-795/16)

(2017/C 006/67)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Moscow Confectionery Factory ‘Krasnyiy oktyabr’ OAO (Moscow, Russia) (represented by: O. Spuhler and M. Geitz, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ (Kiev, Ukraine)

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: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word element ‘CRABS’ — Application for registration No 1 186 110

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 August 2016 in Case R 2507/2015-1

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO 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.

---
EX PARTE Elmer DENNIS, Jr.

CR-17-0060

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 6, 2017

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Case 3:05-cr-00082-L Document 152 Filed 12/15/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 535