alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021320EN.01003502.xml

| 9.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 320/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 320/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2021 — FD v Fusion for Energy Joint Undertaking

(Case T-641/19) (1)

(Civil service - Temporary staff - Fixed-term contract - Decision not to renew - Psychological harassment - Misuse of powers - Duty to have regard for the welfare of staff - Equal treatment - Responsibilities)

(2021/C 320/39)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: FD (represented by: Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Defendants: European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy (represented by: R. Hanak and G. Poszler, Agents, and B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for, first, annulment, in substance, of the decision of the European Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy of 3 December 2018 not to renew the applicant’s fixed-term contract and, secondly, compensation for the material and non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of that decision, concerning an overall strategy of harassment of which, in his opinion, he was a victim.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders FD to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders FD to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 383, 11.11.2019.

---
FDIC-Stats At A Glance

Total

Dollar Amounts in Billions 2nd Qtr 2002 2nd Qtr 2001 2nd Qtr 2002 2nd Qtr 2001 2nd Qtr 2002

Number of FDIC-Insured 7,966 8,178 1,498 1,569 9,464

Number of FDIC-Supervised 4,913 5,027 503 520 5,416

Total Assets $ 6,750 6,360 1,288 1,275 8,038

Total Loans $ 3,972 3,859 849 861 4,821

Domestic Deposits $ 3,807 3,562 806 776 4,613

Net Income $ 23.440 19.097 3.880 3.354 27.320

Percent Profitable % 93.3 92.9 92.2 89.1 93.1

Average Return on Assets % 1.41 1.21 1.21 1.06 1.38

Assets under $1 Billion % 1.26 1.17 0.90 0.71 1.18

Assets over $1 Billion % 1.44 1.21 1.29 1.17 1.42

Average Return on Equity % 15.24 13.83 13.24 12.52 14.92

Net Interest Margin % 4.11 3.90 3.50 3.15 4.01

Equity to Assets % 9.24 8.76 9.29 8.52 9.24

Noncurrent Loans * % 1.47 1.26 0.87 0.76 1.36

Real Estate Loans % 0.95 0.91 0.83 0.72 0.92

C&I Loans % 2.87 2.03 2.27 1.66 2.83

Consumer Loans % 1.40 1.39 0.54 0.74 1.32

Coverage Ratio ** % 127.22 135.07 108.78 116.32 125.07

Net Charge-Off Rate % 1.07 0.83 0.23 0.25 0.92

Real Estate Loans % 0.14 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.11

C&I Loans % 1.76 1.20 1.36 1.09 1.73

Consumer Loans % 3.05 2.56 1.61 1.91 2.92

* Nonaccruing loans and loans past due 90+ days

** Loss reserve as a percentage of noncurrent loans

2nd Qtr

All Insured Institutions 2002 YTD 2001 2000 1999 1998

Credit Card Loans

Held on Balance Sheet $ 268 250 266 227 242

Securitized and Sold $ 369 343 301 293 259

Unused Commitments $ 3,237 2,884 2,539 2,129 2,042

Total Credit Card Lines $ 3,874 3,477 3,106 2,649 2,543

Credit Card Loss Rate % 6.80 5.16 4.36 4.39 5.15

No. of Personal Bankruptcies 760,228 1,451,575 1,217,628 1,281,360 1,397,695

As of June 30, 2002

Commercial Banks Savings Institutions
# C_2022244EN.01002301.xml

| 27.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 244/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 244/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 April 2022 — Giant Electric Vehicle Kunshan v Commission

(Case T-242/19) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of cycles, with pedal assistance, with an auxiliary electric motor, originating in China - Definitive anti-dumping duties - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/73 - Determination of injury - Article 3(2), (3) and (6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 - Price undercutting calculation - Causal link)

(2022/C 244/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Giant Electric Vehicle Kunshan Co. Ltd (Kunshan, China) (represented by: P. De Baere and J. Redelbach, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Luengo and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/73 of 17 January 2019 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitively collecting the provisional duty imposed on imports of electric bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2019 L 16, p. 108, and corrigendum OJ 2019 L 16 I, p. 1) in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/73 of 17 January 2019 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitively collecting the provisional duty imposed on imports of electric bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China in so far as it concerns Giant Electric Vehicle Kunshan Co. Ltd; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/73 of 17 January 2019 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitively collecting the provisional duty imposed on imports of electric bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China in so far as it concerns Giant Electric Vehicle Kunshan Co. Ltd;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Giant Electric Vehicle Kunshan. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Giant Electric Vehicle Kunshan.

---

(1)  OJ C 206, 17.6.2019.

---
Exhibit 32.2









Certification

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





I, Hua Meng, Chief Financial Officer of Dahua Inc. (the "Company") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2006 of the Company, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):



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





(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.







|/s/ Hua Meng                                                   | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Hua Meng, Chief Financial Officer                              | 
|(principal financial officer and principal accounting officer) | 





August 30, 2007
Exhibit 10(xi)

                     2010 Schedule of Director Compensation
                     --------------------------------------

On December 17, 2009, the Compensation Committee approved the following
compensation for the directors of the Company and Monroe Bank (the "Bank") for
the fiscal year ending December 31, 2010:

The directors of the Company and the Bank other than the Chairman of the Board
will be compensated for their services in the amount of $800 per board meeting
held. All directors, other than inside directors, also will receive a fee of
$500 for each committee meeting held. The Chair of the Audit Committee will
receive a fee of $2,000 for each Audit Committee meeting held. All other
committee chairpersons will receive $650 for each committee meeting held. The
Chairman of the Board of Directors will receive an annual fee of $38,000 and
will not receive any additional compensation for meetings attended.

Directors may defer receipt of fees into a grantor trust established by the
Company. Amounts which are deferred are invested by the trust in various mutual
funds or Company common stock at the participant's direction.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 21, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 38492]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15450]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Aging; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel; Clinical Courses.
    Date: August 30, 2021.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Video Meeting).
    Contact Person: Greg Bissonette, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, 
National Institutes of Health, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Gateway 
Building, Suite 2W200, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-1622, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9af8f3e9e9f5f4ffeeeefffdf8daf7fbf3f6b4f4f3f2b4fdf5ec"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="791b100a0a16171c0d0d1c1e1b391418101557171011571e160f">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: July 15, 2021.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2021-15450 Filed 7-20-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**3**

**1 OFFICE**  **OF THE**  **AlTORNEY GENERAL**  **OF TEXAS**  **0 AUSTIN** 

.:. :

‘

.. H~&able'St&sell Rean ' :, .

District Attorney Yiaoo,Texas Dear Sir: / **Attentlonr Mr.**  ROY

erk of ~03.mnar1

case tha NotsrJ Public has failed his &me under his signature."Honorable Stana@ll Bryan, page 2

Seation 1 of House Bill No. S99, **Aots of**  **the** 47th Legislature, read8 In part as tollowsa

*Notaries Publlo shall have the same authorfty to take aoknowledgents or proofs of written fnstru-: .ments,- protests Instruments .pem.lnittedby lrrw,:t.obe., protested, administer oaths, a%?take depositions, as is non or mayhereafter be cohferred by law qon County Clerks-, and.provlded further that all Notariee~ Bublio shall print or stamp their nams under their signatures on all such written izstrucehta, protests instruments, oaths, or depositions; provided that failure to so print or stazp t!mir naxes under their s.ignature+ shall not invalidate such eoknowledgnreqt.” : By~v.lrtti~~.‘b~.

?eqti6n’.aO,,;;8rtla~e i of :&e ‘State .c0nst~tw&& .titiol:es 2941 a&659&, %&io$S ‘Ann~t.&ed ..; Civil Statutes, county olerke are **aade** the recorders **ot** their respective oouatias. krtlcle 6592, Vernon’s Annotated ,Cltil Statutes, provides that the seal oi the county court ohall be:the s&al or the ‘recorder, and shall be used.to .qul;hehti~.atie~,all .his;.o.~~rfioial:,actr,’

.~. &&~dnzire of the rhirder a$ii%iniste&i;~ (First Uati‘onal Ba& v. blcElroy,’ 112 S. b’

. 801). The statutes ( Artiolee 1941 and 6591, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes) provide thet each recorder shall record all instnments of wrltlng authorized or required to be reoorded in his of ’flce without delpy, a&din the order in which they have been ds,oslted. It is the duty of the **clerk** to see t&i% instruments presented fm reoord are properly aoknowledged or proved for reoord, and to reoord all instrmehts so aoknovled@d or. proved ,whl,oh.are entitled to be recorded in his offioa and.are presented to hia for that purp~ose. Bemaybe~ooqelled by nmdemm to reoord suoh ah instrmeat

. (Hollie Y. Tlkland Corp., 40 3. W. (2d) 63; Texas Jurisprudenoe, Vat, 36, page 418).

Upon preseat:tlon of an lnstrumeat for reoord, the olerk must see that it is properly aoknou:ladged; andwhere the lnatrment hss bean recorded it wlll be gesuxed, prima faoie, that he did hl.s duty in this res?eot nhdthat the writing was so aoknovrledged as properly to authorize its registration. Texas Jurisprudence, Vol. 36, page 440.-9.

Bonomble Stanaell Bryan, page 3

It will **be** noted that Bouae Bill !io. 369, eupra, speolrloally provldea that failure to print or at-p the nameor the notary publfo under his algaature shall not 

## ~~mid~tesmh aoknowledgmnt. As above 

## etated,the duties of the reoorder are ninlaterial , a.?d it i6his further duty to see that 1nstruzzent.s presented for reoord, ese properly eoknowlea~ed~ or proved for record, and to reoord all lnstruuenta so aolzowledged w3ic:i are entitled to be recorded 13 his orflce and are presented to bin ror that purpose.

Therefore, in view of the foregoing authorities, werespeotfullp snewsr the above stated quastion In the arrirziative.
*This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

Filed 4/30/96

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 95-7132

v. (D.C. No. CV-94-666-C)

PAULINE W. CODY, (E.D. Okla.)

Defendant - Appellant.

 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, McKAY and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered

submitted without oral argument.

We affirm for the reasons given by the district court.

AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
2

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay

Circuit Judge
# oe..___

6H IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 21 - 0390 RANDY LAEDEKE, DARLA PRENN, fo r THE ESTATE OF LILA M. LAEDEKE,

Plaint iffs and Appellants, v. BILLINGS CLINIC, and John Doe Defendants unknown at this time,

Defendant and Appellee. SECOND ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

On May 31, 2021 Lisa Speare was ap pointed as Mediator under M.R.AppP., 7 (4) ( c ) . S he ha s since de clined th e appo int ment. IT IS ORDERED THAT th e appoint me ntof Lisa Speare is h ereby rescinded . **Mary E.**  **Duncan,** whose name appears next on th e list of attorneys desiring appoint me ntas mediators fo r Money Judgments appeals wh ich is maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appo int ed to conduct th e mediat io n process requi red by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and IT IS FU RTHER ORDERED th at th e time peri ods set fo rth in M.R.App.P., 7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appoint me nt . A true copy

of this order is being mailed to counsel of record f or the parti es, or to th e parti es individually

if not represented by counsel , on the date hereof. DATED thi s September 9, 2021.

Bowen Greenwood , Clerk of the Supreme Court c: Randy

S. Laedeke, David Patrick Whisenand, Lisa A. Speare, Mary E. Duncan 09/09/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0390
# C_2019413EN.01006602.xml

| 9.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 413/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 413/66

---

Order of the General Court of 24 September 2019 — BigBen Interactive v EUIPO — natcon7 (nacon)

(Case T-287/19) (1)

(2019/C 413/79)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 220, 1.7.2019.

---
Exhibit
32.2





Certification Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906 of
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Joel Boyarski, the Principal
Financial Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Q of WorldGate
Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009, which this
certification accompanies, fully complies with requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and
information contained in the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.





A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to WorldGate and will be
retained by WorldGate and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.





Dated:
      August 14, 2009
              
              /s/
      Joel
      BoyarskiJoel
      BoyarskiChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial and Accounting
Officer)
### NUMBER 13 - 14 - 00 286 - CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN THE INTEREST OF M.F. & J.F., CHILDREN

On appeal from County Court at Law No. 5 of Nueces County, Texas.


# O R D E R Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Benavides

Order Per Curiam This is an appeal of a final order terminating parental rights

. Appellant’s brief in
this matter was due on July 28, 2014

. On July 23, 2014, a ppellant filed a motion for extension of time seeking an additional twenty days to file the brief. Appeals in parental termination and child protection cases are governed by the rules of appellate procedure for accelerated appeals, but include additional expedited deadlines and procedures. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 28.4; T EX

. R. J UD

. A DMIN . 6.2(a). The intermediate appellate courts are directed to ensure "as far as reasonably possible" that appeals are brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is2

filed. See T EX

. R. J UD

. A DMIN

. 6.2(a). Given the nature of these cases and the shortened appellate deadlines, the Court does not favor motions for extension of time to file the record or briefs. In accordance with the limited time for consideration of these appeals, it is the policy o f this Court to limit extensions of time to file a brief to one ten

day extension of time absent truly extraordinary circumstances. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 38.6(d). Accordingly, w e ORDER appellant’s counsel , the Honorable G. Marc Cervantes , to file the brie f within ten days of the date of this order. No further extensions of time will be granted absent truly exigent and extraordinary circumstances. The Clerk of this Court is ORDERED to serve a copy of this order on appell ant by certified mail, return receip t requested. It is so ORDERED. PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed t his 2 8 th day of July 2014.
# C_2019230EN.01006602.xml

| 8.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/66

---

Order of the General Court of 14 May 2019 — Bacardi v EUIPO — La Fée (ANGEL’S ENVY)

(Case T-115/19) (1)

(2019/C 230/80)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 139, 15.4.2019.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          22,021
<SECURITIES>                                    30,491
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,431
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,188
<INVENTORY>                                      1,217
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                67,655
<PP&E>                                          31,743
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,877
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  97,456
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,166
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           342
<OTHER-SE>                                      84,304
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    97,456
<SALES>                                         40,567
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                50,492
<CGS>                                            5,398
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,614
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                25,633
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 15,749
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,214
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,535
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,535
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .28


</TABLE>
# C_2021422EN.01001201.xml

| 18.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 422/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 422/12

---

Judgment of the General Court of 1 September 2021 — e*Message Wireless Information Services v EUIPO — Apple (e*message)

(Case T-834/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark e*message - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctive character - Declaration of invalidity - Provisions applicable ratione temporis - Application of subsequent case-law - Article 17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Principles of protection of legitimate expectations and of legal certainty)

(2021/C 422/16)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: e*Message Wireless Information Services GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Hotz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Apple Inc. (Cupertino, California, United States) (represented by: V. Schmitz-Fohrmann, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 September 2019 (Case R 2454/2018-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Apple and e*Message Wireless Information Services.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders e*Message Wireless Information Services GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Apple Inc. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders e*Message Wireless Information Services GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Apple Inc.

---

(1)  OJ C 45, 10.2.2020.

---