alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING PANASONIC'S ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO SEAL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, 

Defendant.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING PANASONIC'S 

ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO 

SEAL

Re: Dkt. No. 1403

Applying the compelling reasons standard, the Court rules on Panasonic’s motion to seal 

as follows. Panasonic’s motion appears to follow the convention that the first page of each 

document is page 1. Therefore, the Court follows Panasonic’s convention.

Document Portions of Pages Ruling

QX9351 Page 2 GRANTED.

QX9351 Page 3 GRANTED.

QX9148 Page 2 GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 24, 2019

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1416 Filed 01/24/19 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>

Exhibit 23.2

                        INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Kendle International Inc. on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-57577, 333-61780,
333-75479, 333-34261 and 333-108163) of our report dated March 14, 2004 relating
to the financial statements of Kendle International Inc. as of and for the year
ending December 31, 2003, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Kendle
International Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2003.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Cincinnati, Ohio
March 14, 2004
# m8613.docx

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 5.10.2017 C(2017) 6850 To the notifying parties: Subject : Case M.8613 - KONICA MINOLTA / INNOVATION NETWORK CORPORATION OF JAPAN / AMBRY GENETICS Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 1 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area 2 Dear Sir or Madam, 1. On 01 September 2017 , the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which Konica Minolta, Inc. ("KM", Japan) and Innovation Network Corporation of Japan ("INCJ", Japan) indirectly acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control of Ambry Genetics Corp ("AG" , USA) . The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares . 3 2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are: - for KM: a technology company specializing in imaging products, data analysis optics and nano -fabrication. In this respect, KM develops and manufactures a wide range of hardware and software products that offer solutions to businesses. KM is active in 150 countries, across Europe, USA, Japan, China, Asia and other countries. - for INCJ : a public-private partnership of the Japanese Gover nment and 26 private companies. INCJ pursues investment activities by providing financial, technological and management support to next generation businesses. It provides risk capital over the medium to long term to innovative enterprises with a growth potential that brings a value to society. - for AG : a healthcare company based in the US. It provides genetic laboratory testing services and is active in related genetic research activities. AG operates in California and focuses its business on the US and Canada with negligible activities in the EU. 3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and of paragraph 5 ( a ) and ( b ) of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 . 4 4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the internal market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement . For the Commission
(S igned)
Johannes LAITENBERGER Director - General
(1)
OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 ( the ' Merger Regulation ' ). With effect from 1 December 2009, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ( ' TFEU ' ) has introduced certain changes, such as the replacement of ' Community ' by ' Union ' and ' common market ' by ' internal market ' . The terminology of the TFEU will be used throughout this decision.
(2) OJ L 1, 3.1.1994, p. 3 ( the ' EEA Agreement ' ).
(3) Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 29 9 , 09.9.2 017 , p. 4 .
(4)
OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5 .
Exhibit 23.1  Consent of Independent Auditors  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-119501 and 333-33780) pertaining to the 1997 Stock Option and Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan, as amended, of Robocom Systems International Inc. of our reports dated September 13, 2006 and August 3, 2007 with respect to the financial statements of Robocom Systems International Inc. included in the Annual Reports on Form 10-KSB for the years ended May 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.   /s/ Eisner & Lubin, LLP
    New York, New York February 25, 2008
L.C.M. and J.K. v. SHELBY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2160768

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

February 9, 2018

Affirmed.
Dontae Rashawn MORRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D13-1971

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed August 2, 2017

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, Terri L. Backhus, Special Assistant Public Defender, and Cynthia Dodge, Assistant Public Defender (substituted as counsel of record), Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cerese Crawford Taylor, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, CRENSHAW, and SALARIO, JR., Concur.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-1094

(Serial No. 76/600,374)

IN RE MARISOL, LLC

John Joseph Hall , Law Offices of John Joseph Hall, of Los Angeles, California,

argued for appellant.

Christina J. Hieber , Associate Solicitor, Office of t he Solicitor, United States Patent

and Trademark Office, of Arlington, Virginia, argued for the Director of the United States

Patent and Trademark Office. Wi th her on the brief were Stephen Walsh , Acting Solicitor,

and Thomas V. Shaw , Associate Solicitor.

Appealed from: United States Patent and Trademark Office

Trademark Tria l and Appeal BoardNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-1094

(Serial No. 76/600,374)

IN RE MARISOL, LLC



# Judgment

ON APPEAL from the United States Pat ent and Trademark Offi ce, Trademark Trial

and Appeal Board

in CASE NO(S). Serial No. 76/600,374

This CAUSE having been hear d and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (NEWMAN, Circuit Judge , PLAGER, Senior Circuit Judge , and

GAJARSA, Circuit Judge ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED June 20, 2008 _/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-83,285-02

EX P ARTE DARRYL EARL DAN IELS , JR., Applicant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 114-0391-C IN THE 114TH DIST RICT COURT

F ROM SMITH COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y o u ng , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of ag gravat ed robber y and sentenc ed to twenty year s’ imprisonment. The Twelfth Court of Appea ls dismiss ed his appea l. Daniels v. State , No. 12-15-00023- CR (Tex. App.—Tyler Feb. 11, 2015) (not designated for publication). Applicant contends, among other things, that he was denied his right to appea l. Applicant has alleg ed fac ts that, if true, might entitle him to relief

. Strickland v. W

ashington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson , 993 S.W .2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); Ex parte Axe l , 757 S.W .2d 3692

(Tex. Crim. App. 1988). In these circ umstances, additional fac ts are neede d. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez , 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for finding s of fact. The trial court shall order trial counsel to resp o n d

. S ee Jones v. State , 98 S.W .3d 700, 702 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (“I f the defe ndant decide s to appea l, the attorney must ensure that written notice of appea l is filed with the trial court.” ). The trial court may use any means set out in T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d)

. I f the trial court elects t o hold a hearing , it shall deter mine whether Applican t is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and wi s h es to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repre sent him at the hea ring . T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. After revie wing trial counsel’s response , the trial court shall make further finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to whether Applica nt was denie d his right to an a ppeal. The trial court shall also make a

ny other finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law that it deems rele vant and appropriate to the dispositi on of Applica nt’s claim for ha

beas c orpus re lief. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this order

. A supplement al t ranscript containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of the court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, alongwith the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be forwa rded to this Court within 120 day s of the date of this order

. Any extensions of time must be reque sted by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court. Filed: September

12, 2018 Do not publish.
Weinberg & Company, PA
                                                     Certified Public Accountant
                                             1875 Century Park East  - Suite 600
                                                           Los Angeles, CA 90067
                                    Tel:(310) 407 - 5450  FAX:  (310) 407 - 5451



                      CONSENT OF THE INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT


As  the  independent  auditor for EAPI Entertainment, Inc. (Formerly Duro Enzyme
Products, Inc.), I hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Form
10-KSB  statement  of  my  report,  relating to the audited financial statements
dated February 27, 2004 for the year ended September 30, 2003.



/s/  Weinberg & Company

March 17, 2004


<PAGE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

ALI ODEH, and OSAMA “SAM” 

ODEH, §

§

Plaintiffs, §

§

v. § Civil Action No. 4:06-CV-0225-K

§

RICHARD B. ROPER, et al., §

§

Defendants. §

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND

RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court has under consideration the Findings, Conclusions and

Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Paul D. Stickney on Defendants

Timothy Spaulding and Gabrielle Taylor’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ First Amended

Complaint, filed June 6, 2006. The District Court reviewed the findings of the United

States Magistrate Judge de novo. The Court accepts the Findings, Conclusions and

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Spaulding and Taylor’s motion

to dismiss is GRANTED. 

SO ORDERED this 7 day of September, 2006. th

____________________________________

ED KINKEADE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 4:06-cv-00225-N Document 111 Filed 09/07/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 713
Clarence S. TELFAIR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2319

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 3, 2019

Clarence S. Telfair, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED.

Roberts, Wetherell, and Makar, JJ., concur.
George DELANCY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-258

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 27, 2019

**FLORIDA DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.1

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



In connection with this annual report on Form 40-F of Enterra Energy Trust for the period ended December 31, 2006 I, Keith Conrad, President and 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:
April 19, 2007 | By: | /s/ Keith Conrad
Keith Conrad
President and 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.B., Father of C.B., a Child, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-4016

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 20, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 24 (Thursday, February 6, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 9090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-02273]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--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: February 6, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean 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 29, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] Contract 
608 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-1163, K2025-1163.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2025-02273 Filed 2-5-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
Andrew CORPUS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Kristin KANNER, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1938

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 28, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Emmanuel DESOTO, Appellant, v. Elizabeth DESOTO, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1436, 5D18-2058

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed June 11, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
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:*                         February 6, 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 30, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1325 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1165, K2025-1165.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-02268 Filed 2-5-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.14


            NOMINATING COMMITTEE CHARTER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
                     CENTENNIAL SPECIALTY FOODS CORPORATION

PURPOSE

The purpose for the Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors of Centennial
Specialty Foods Corporation (the "Company") shall be to seek and recommend to
the Board of Directors nomination of qualified candidates for election to the
Board of Directors at Centennial Specialty Foods Corporation's Annual Meeting of
Stockholders. In addition, the Nominating Committee will seek qualified
candidates to fill vacancies on the Board of Directors subject to appointment by
the Board of Directors with direct input from the Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer.

NOMINATION/APPOINTMENT POLICY

The Nominating Committee believes that it is in the best interests of the
Company and its stockholders to obtain highly-qualified candidates to serve as
members of the Board of Directors. The Nominating Committee will seek candidates
for nomination and appointment that are independent with excellent
decision-making ability, business experience, marketing and food industry
background, personal integrity and reputation.

MEMBERSHIP

The Nominating Committee will consist of a minimum of two members appointed by
the Board of Directors. The members of the Nominating Committee will be
appointed by and serve at the discretion of the Board of Directors.

MEETINGS

Meetings of the Nominating Committee will be held at least once annually to
evaluate and make recommendations to the Board of Directors of qualified
candidates to be nominated by the Board of Directors for election to the Board
of Directors at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Other meetings of the
Nominating Committee will be held, from time to time, as the members of the
Nominating Committee or Board of Directors determine are necessary in response
to the needs of the Board of Directors.

REPORTS

The Nominating Committee will provide written reports to the Board of Directors
regarding the Nominating Committee nominations for election or appointment to
the Board of Directors.



                                       1

<PAGE>


MINUTES

The Nominating Committee will maintain written minutes of its meetings, which
minutes will be filed with the minutes of the meetings of the Board of
Directors.



                                       2
# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ April 18 , 2023 ERRATA

______________________ Appeal Nos. 2021

- 2263, 2021

- 2264, 2021

- 2265, 2021

- 2266 SEQUOIA TECHNOLOGY, LLC, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v. DELL, INC., DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., EMC

CORPORATION, AKA DELL EMC, HEWLETT

PACKARD ENTERPRISE CO., HITACHI VANTARA CORPORATION, SUPER MICRO COMPUTER, INC., HITACHI LTD., Defendants

- Appellees

-------------- ----------------------------------- Appeal No. 2021

- 2267 RED HAT, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant

- Appellee

v. SEQUOIA TECHNOLOGY, LLC, Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff

- Appellant ELECTRONICS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS Case: 21-2263 Document: 69 Page: 1 Filed: 04/18/2023SEQUOIA TECHNOLOGY , LLC v. DELL , INC
. 2
RESEARCH INSTITUTE, Defendant

- Appellant

v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION, Counterclaim Defendant

- Appellee

______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in No. 1:18

- cv - 02027

- LPS

- CJB, Judge Leonard P. Stark.

__ ____________________ Decided: April 12, 2023

Precedential Opinion

______________________ Please make the following change: On page 15, footnote 5, change “ The district court did rely on this extrinsic evidence, see Decision , 2021 WL 2010448, at *3 , ” to “The district court did not explicitly rely on this extrinsic evidence, see Decision , 2021 WL 2010448, at *3

– 4 ” Case: 21-2263 Document: 69 Page: 2 Filed: 04/18/2023