alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 16, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. 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 January 8, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1278 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1100, K2025-1099.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-00927 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

 DALLAS DIVISION 

T-NETIX, INC. ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant ) 

 ) 

 v. ) 

 ) 

VALUE-ADDED COMMUNICATIONS, ) 

 INC. ) Case No. 3-05-654-D 

 ) 

 Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff ) 

 v. ) 

 ) 

SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ) 

 ) 

 Counter-Defendant ) 

 ) 

ORDER GRANTING VALUE-ADDED COMMUNICATIONS, INC.’S 

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL

 The Court, having considered Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Value-Added 

Communications, Inc.’s (“VAC”) Motion for Leave to File Under Seal, finds good cause for 

GRANTING the Motion for Leave. 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that VAC’s Motion for Leave to File Under Seal 

[Doc. #311] is GRANTED, and it is hereby: 

FURTHER ORDERED that the following documents shall be filed under seal: 

 (1) Value-Added Communications, Inc.’s Objections to the United States 

Magistrate’s March 28, 2013 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations, and 

Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof; and 

 (2) Value-Added Communications, Inc.’s Appendix in Support of Objections to the 

United States Magistrate’s March 28, 2013 Findings, Conclusions and 

Recommendations. 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Case 3:05-cv-00654-D Document 314 Filed 04/12/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID 8959
 

Dated: April 12, 2013. ___________________________ 

 SIDNEY A. FITZWATER 

 CHIEF JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-00654-D Document 314 Filed 04/12/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID 8960
M.K.A. v. CULLMAN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2170133

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

December 14, 2017

Dismissed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 10 (Thursday, January 16, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4817-4818]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00905]

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

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 7, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract

[[Page 4818]]

1262 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-1081, K2025-1080.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2025-00905 Filed 1-15-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
# C_2018399EN.01001201.xml

| 5.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/12

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 6 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Oberösterreich — Austria) — Proceedings brought by Gmalieva s.r.o. and Others

(Case C-79/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Freedom to provide services - Gambling services - Gambling monopoly in a Member State - National legislation prohibiting the operation of slot machines without prior authorisation from the administrative authorities)

(2018/C 399/15)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Oberösterreich

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Gmalieva s.r.o., Celik KG, PBW GmbH, Antoaneta Claudia Gruber, Play For Me GmbH, Haydar Demir

Intervener: Landespolizeidirektion Oberösterreich

Operative part of the order

It is for the referring court to determine, in the light of the guidance given by the Court of Justice inter alia in the judgment of 30 April 2014, Pfleger and Others (C-390/12, EU:C:2014:281), whether a national statutory monopoly scheme in respect of games of chance, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, is to be regarded as coherent, in the light of Article 56 TFEU et seq., where national judicial proceedings have established that:

| — | gambling addiction does not represent a societal problem justifying State intervention; |
| --- | --- |

—

gambling addiction does not represent a societal problem justifying State intervention;

| — | the playing of prohibited games gives rise to police involvement in an administrative context and not to criminal offences; |
| --- | --- |

—

the playing of prohibited games gives rise to police involvement in an administrative context and not to criminal offences;

| — | annual State income from games of chance exceeds EUR 500 million, being 0,4 % of the annual budget; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annual State income from games of chance exceeds EUR 500 million, being 0,4 % of the annual budget; and

| — | the advertising measures undertaken by licensees also seek principally to entice persons who have not previously played games of chance to do so. |
| --- | --- |

—

the advertising measures undertaken by licensees also seek principally to entice persons who have not previously played games of chance to do so.

---

(1)  OJ C 178, 6.6.2017.

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification ofChief Executive Officer ofAdvance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc.Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350(Adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Advance America, Cash AdvanceCenters, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Kenneth E.Compton, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify, 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 fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and

2.                Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|          | /s/ KENNETH E.  COMPTON                 |   |
|----------|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|     | Kenneth E. Compton                      |   |
| * * | *President and Chief Executive Officer* |

 

August 8, 2006

1

----
# C_2023045EN.01003301.xml

| 6.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 45/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/33

---

Order of the General Court of 30 November 2022 — C & J Clark International v Commission

(Cases T-790/16 and T-861/16) (1)

(2023/C 45/42)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the cases be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 14, 16.1.2017.

---
Gail WALLACE v. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND DEVELOPMENT

NO. 2019-C-0136

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 18, 2019

Denied.
GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Enrique BARQUINERO and Gerald Freeman, Jr., Appellees.

No. 1D19-0675

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
# C_2019016EN.01002201.xml

| 14.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/22

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 November 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State — Netherlands) — K v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

(Case C-484/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2003/86/EC - Right to family reunification - Article 15 - Refusal to grant an autonomous residence permit - National legislation providing for a requirement to pass a civic integration examination))

(2019/C 16/26)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: K

Respondent: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(1) and (4) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification does not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which permits an application for an autonomous residence permit, lodged by a third country national who has resided over five years in a Member State by virtue of family reunification, to be rejected on the ground that he has not shown that he has passed a civic integration test on the language and society of that Member State provided that the detailed rules for the requirement to pass that examination do not go beyond what is necessary to attain the objective of facilitating the integration of those third country nationals, which is for the referring court to ascertain.

---

(1)  OJ C 374, 6.11.2017.

---
Case 2:04-cv-00119-J Document 63 Filed 11/02/05 Page 1 of 5 PageID 400
 

 Case 2:04-cv-00119-J Document 63 Filed 11/02/05 Page 2 of 5 PageID 401
 

 Case 2:04-cv-00119-J Document 63 Filed 11/02/05 Page 3 of 5 PageID 402
 

 Case 2:04-cv-00119-J Document 63 Filed 11/02/05 Page 4 of 5 PageID 403
 

 Case 2:04-cv-00119-J Document 63 Filed 11/02/05 Page 5 of 5 PageID 404
Case 3:04-cv-00969-K Document 54 Filed 09/26/05 Page 1 of 8 PageID 721
Case 3:04-cv-00969-K Document 54 Filed 09/26/05 Page 2 of 8 PageID 722
Case 3:04-cv-00969-K Document 54 Filed 09/26/05 Page 3 of 8 PageID 723
Case 3:04-cv-00969-K Document 54 Filed 09/26/05 Page 4 of 8 PageID 724
Case 3:04-cv-00969-K Document 54 Filed 09/26/05 Page 5 of 8 PageID 725
Case 3:04-cv-00969-K Document 54 Filed 09/26/05 Page 6 of 8 PageID 726
Case 3:04-cv-00969-K Document 54 Filed 09/26/05 Page 7 of 8 PageID 727
Case 3:04-cv-00969-K Document 54 Filed 09/26/05 Page 8 of 8 PageID 728
# C_2017144EN.01003202.xml

| 8.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 144/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 144/32

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Monomeles Protodikeio Athens (Greece) lodged on 7 March 2017 — OL v PQ

(Case C-111/17 PPU)

(2017/C 144/42)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Referring court

Monomeles Protodikeio Athens (Greece)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: OL

Applicant:

Defendant: PQ

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

What is the appropriate interpretation of the concept of ‘habitual residence’, within the meaning of Article 11(1) of Regulation (ΕC) No 2201/2003 (1) concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, in the case of an infant who fortuitously or due to force majeure has been born in a place other than that which her parents with joint parental responsibility for the child intended to be the place of her habitual residence, and was then unlawfully retained by one parent in the State where she was born, or removed to a third State. More specifically, is physical presence a necessary and self-evident prerequisite, in all circumstances, for establishing the habitual residence of a person, and in particular a new-born child?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 338, p. 1.

1

---
SUCCESSION OF Fannie Canale CANNATA

Succession of Vincent Cannata c/w Cannata's Super Market, Inc. v. Guy Thomas Cannata, Independent Executor of the Succession of Vincent Cannata

NO. 2019-OC-0348

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 22, 2019

Denied.

WEIMER, J., would grant.
THEATTORNEYGENERAL 

OF TEXAS 

AURTIN. %bXAS 78711 

Honorable Joe Resweber 

County Attorney 

Harris County Courthouse 

Houston, Texas 77002 

Opinion No. H-990 

Re: Whether Harris County 

may charge tolls on the 

Lynchburg ferry. 

Dear Mr. Resweber: 

You have requested our opinion regarding whether the 

commissioners court of Harris County may charge tolls for 

crossings on the Lynchburg ferry. 

The commissioners court has for many years operated the 

Lynchburg ferry as a free ferry across the Houston Ship 

Channel. Its authority to do so is derived from article 

2351, V.T.C.S., which provides, in pertinent part: 

Each commissioners court shall: 

. . . . 

2. Establish public ferries whenever the public interest may 

require. 

The commissioners court is not authorized thereby, however, 

to assess tolls for ferriage. It is well established that 

a county _ possesses . only those powers specifically conferred 

by the Constitution and by statute. Canales v. Laughlin, 214 

S.W.Zd 451, 453 (Tex. 1948). 

Two statutes, articles 6801 and 1476, V.T.C.S., authorize 

a commissioners court to assess rates of ferriage. Both'relate, however, to the imposition of tolls and charges on pri- 

;;;;ly operated ferries. See V.T.C.S. arts. 6798-6812; 1474- 

. In our opinion, thesestatutes furnish no basis for 

concluding that a commissioners court may charge tolls on 

county-operated ferries. Furthermore, a number of other statutes 

clearly authorize a county to charge tolls on county-operated 

bridges and tunnels. See V.T.C.S. arts. 6795a; 6795b; 6795c. - 

p. 4112 
Honorable Joe Resweber - page 2 (H-990) 

See also Attorney General Opinion H-825 (1976). The absence -- 

of any such language in article 2351, or elsewhere, authorizing 

a commissioners court to assess and collect tolls on its 

county-operated ferries, compels the conclusion that it may 

not do so. 

SUMMARY 

The commissioners court of Harris County 

may not charge tolls for crossings on the 

county-operated Lynchburg ferry. 

-Very truly yours, 

/ j Attorney General of Texas 

APPROVED: u 

Opinion Committee 

km1 

p. 4113
# C_2023271EN.01002301.xml

| 31.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 June 2023 — Polwax v Commission

(Case T-585/20) (1)

(Competition - Concentrations - Upstream market for slack wax - Downstream market for paraffin waxes - Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the internal market and the EEA Agreement - Absence of commitment to supply slack wax - Vertical effects - Foreclosure of the input market)

(2023/C 271/33)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Polwax S.A. (Jasło, Poland) (represented by: E. Nessmann and G. Duda, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan, G. Meessen and J. Szczodrowski, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Polski Koncern Naftowy Orlen S.A. (Płock, Poland) (represented by: M. Mataczyński, lawyer)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the Commission Decision of 14 July 2020 (case M.9014), adopted under Article 8(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (OJ 2004 L 24, p. 1), by which the European Commission declared a concentration between Polski Koncern Naftowy Orlen S.A. (‘Orlen’) and Grupa Lotos S.A. to be compatible with the internal market and with Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA), subject to Orlen’s compliance with certain commitments.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Polwax S.A. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Polwax S.A. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 399, 23.11.2020.

---
**EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

     **18 U.S.C. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DYNAMIC ALERT LIMITED (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bradley Hawkings, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: February 13, 2009

By: ***/s/ Bradley Hawkings***

Bradley Hawkings

Chief Financial Officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer

----
# C_2016475EN.01002402.xml

| 19.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 475/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 475/24

---

Action brought on 8 November 2016 — Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo "Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ v EUIPO — ‘Krasnyj Octyabr’ (Representation of a crayfish)

(Case T-775/16)

(2016/C 475/36)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo "Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ (Kiev, Ukraine) (represented by: R. Žabolienė and I. Lukauskienė, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Joint-Stock Company ‘Krasnyj Octyabr’ (Moscow, Russia)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant: Applicant

Applicant:

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union No 1 191 921

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 2419/2015-1

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) Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

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

---
STATE of Louisiana v. Cliff MALBROUGH

NO. 2018-KH-0358

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 18, 2019

Denied.
R.R. v. A.C.

2160963

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

September 7, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Randolph Cir. Ct. for trial de novo pursuant to Rule 28(D), Ala. R.Juv.P.
EX PARTE Stephen Dewayne PARKER

1160550 (CR-15-0602)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 7, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
Statement Pursuant to Section
906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The undersigned, Gary D. Woerz, President and
Chief Fiancial Officer of International American Technologies, Inc, a Nevada corporation,
hereby makes the following certification as required by Section 906(a) of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, with respect to the following of this annual report filed
pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: Quarterly Report of Form
10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005.

The undersigned certifies that the above annual
report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and information contained in the above quarterly report fairly presents, in
all respects, the financial condition of International American Technologies, Inc. and
results of its operations.

Date: May 20, 2005
Gary D. Woerz
President and CFO/s/ Gary D. Woerz
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

VS.

LINDA TATUM,

Defendant.

)

)

)

) CRIMINAL ACTION NO.

)

) 3:03-CR-159(01)-G

)

)

)

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files and records in this

case, and the findings and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge

dated October 13, 2011, the court finds that the findings and recommendation of the

magistrate judge are correct and they are accepted as the findings and

recommendation of the court. 

It is, therefore, ORDERED that the findings and recommendation of the

United States Magistrate Judge are accepted. 

December 5, 2012.

___________________________________

A. JOE FISH

Senior United States District Judge
Arturo ZAMORA, Appellant, v. IX DESIGN, INC. /NORMANDY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellees.

No. 1D18-2628

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Michael O'BRIEN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3220

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.