alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019295EN.01004101.xml

| 2.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/41

---

Action brought on 28 June 2019 — Frittelli v Parliament

(Case T-414/19)

(2019/C 295/53)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Leda Frittelli (Frosinone, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare non-existent or annul in its entirety the measure of which the applicant was informed by means of the contested communication, in which the European Parliament re-determined retirement pension rights and ordered recovery of the amount paid on the basis of the earlier pension calculation;

| — | order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Parliament to refund all the sums unduly withheld, and to pay statutory interest from the date of withholding to the date of payment and order the European Parliament to implement the judgment and undertake all the necessary initiatives, acts or measures to ensure the immediate, full re-establishment of the original pension amount;

| — | order the European Parliament to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-389/19, Coppo Gavazzi v Parliament.

---
Exhibit 31.2
 
 CERTIFICATIONS
 
 I, Brian Bonar, certify that:
 
 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of The Amanda Company, Inc. (the "Company");
 
 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and
 
 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.
 
 4. The Company's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Company and have:
 
 a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;
 
 b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 c) disclosed in this report any change in the Company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company's most recent fiscal year that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting;
 
 5. The Company's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company's auditors and the audit committee of Company's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions);
 
 a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the Company's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Company's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
 
 b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal controls over financial reporting.
 
 
 Date: January 12, 2004
 /s/ Brian Bonar_____________Brian Bonar
Chief Executive Officer
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.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4506-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (FEMA-4506-DR), dated March 30, 2020, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This change occurred on July 6, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, MaryAnn Tierney, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Janice P. Barlow as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2021-15624 Filed 7-21-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Antonio SEBASTIAN-ANTONIO, a.k.a. Antonio Alberto Sebastian, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-11543

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Sept. 29, 2011.

Steven E. Butler, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Kenyen Ray Brown, U.S. Attorney, Donna Barrow Dobbins, David Andrew Si-gler, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Mobile, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Elsie Mae Miller, Fred W. Tiemann, Carlos A. Williams, Federal Defender’s Office, Mobile, AL, Antonio Sebastian-Antonio, Manchester, KY, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before TJOFLAT, WILSON and BLACK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Elsie Mae Miller, appointed counsel for Antonio Sebastian-Antonio in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Sebastian-Antonio’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1


                           10.1 PACIFIC STATE BANCORP

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
    Regarding Annual Report on Form 10-k for the Year Ended December 31, 2004
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

     In connection with the Annual Report of Pacific State Bancorp (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report'), the
undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of their
knowledge, that:

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

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



                                  Date: March 31, 2005
                                  BY: /s/ Steven A. Rosso
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  President and Chief Executive Officer
                                  Date: March 31, 2005


                                  BY: /s/ JoAnne Roberts
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Senior Vice President and
                                  Chief Financial Officer
                                  Date: March 31, 2005
# Official Journal C 419/2022

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 419 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6531 October 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 419

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6531 October 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 419/01 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 September 2022 to 30 September 2022
  (Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  or Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council) | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 419/01

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 September 2022 to 30 September 2022
  (Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  or Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council

or Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kevin McDONALD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-6197.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 28, 2011.

Decided: Aug. 2, 2011.

Kevin McDonald, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Wiley Miller, Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

*76Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Kevin McDonald appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reduction of sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. McDonald,*No. 3:04-cr-00255-JRS-2 (E.D.Va. Jan. 18, 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
#### In the Matter of the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent, to acquire lands of The Charlotte Iron Works, Appellant.

(Argued April 14, 1890;

decided April 29, 1890.)

Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, made December 29, 1889, which reversed an order of Special Term granting the respondent’s application for the appointment of commissioners herein.

*Theodore Bacon*for appellant.

*Edward Harris*for respondent.

Agree to affirm on opinion below.*

All concur.

Order affirmed.
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 11.1

              Statement Regarding Computation Of Per Share Earnings

                     TB Wood's Corporation And Subsidiaries

                                 January 1, 1999
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                        1998           1997           1996
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                                    <C>            <C>            <C>   
Net income                                                             $7,890         $8,689         $4,640
                                                             ===============================================

Per share of common stock:
Basic:
    Income before extraordinary item                                   $ 1.34         $ 1.49         $ 1.08
    Extraordinary item                                                    .00            .00          (.24)
                                                             -----------------------------------------------

Net income per common share                                            $ 1.34         $ 1.49          $ .84
                                                             ===============================================

Weighted average shares of common stock and
   equivalents outstanding                                              5,874          5,833          5,520
                                                             ===============================================

Diluted:
   Income before extraordinary item                                    $ 1.33         $ 1.47         $ 1.06
   Extraordinary item                                                     .00            .00          (.23)
                                                             -----------------------------------------------

Net income per common share                                            $ 1.33         $ 1.47          $ .83
                                                             ===============================================

Weighted average shares of common stock and
   equivalents outstanding                                              5,932          5,921          5,600
                                                             ===============================================
</TABLE>



                                       61
#### Kyle W. LAUKUS, Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 10-5148.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Dec. 12, 2011.

Terry Wayne Vincent, Anastasia Joy Wade, Brouse McDowell, LPA, Cleveland, OH, for Appellant.

Kyle W. Laukus, Benton Harbor, MI, pro se.

Janet Arlene Bradley, Joan I. Oppenheimer, Gilbert Steven Rothenberg, Esquire, Deputy Assistant, U.S. Department of Justice, R. Craig Lawrence, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Washington, DC, for Appel-lee.

Before: GARLAND and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges, and RANDOLPH, Senior Circuit Judge.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia was presented to the court, and briefed and argued by counsel. The court has afforded the issues full consideration and has determined that they do not warrant a published opinion. *See*D.C.Cir. R. 36(d). It is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment of the district court be affirmed.

Both parties agree that venue for this lawsuit does not he in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. If a suit is filed in the wrong district, 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) provides that a district court “shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.” Athough we do not rule on the district court’s determination that no federal court would have subject-matter jurisdiction over Laukus’ claims, the district court clearly did not abuse its discretion in holding that transfer was not “in the interest of justice.” *See Naartex Consulting Corp. v. Watt,*722 F.2d 779, 789 (D.C.Cir.1983). Indeed, the appellant’s pleadings, both in the district court and this court, did not even request transfer. We therefore affirm the dismissal of the case under § 1406(a).

The Clerk is directed to withhold the issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after the disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. R. 41(a)(1).
#### PEOPLE, Respondent, v. JONES, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

November 13, 1907.)

Proceedings by the people of the state of New York against Jane Jones.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment of conviction affirmed.

KRUSE and ROBSON, JJ., dissent.
# C_2019305EN.01006401.xml

| 9.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/64 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/64

---

Action brought on 19 July 2019 — Lego v EUIPO — Delta Sport Handelskontor (Building blocks from a toy building set)

(Case T-515/19)

(2019/C 305/74)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Lego A/S (Billund, Denmark) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and J. Fuhrmann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Delta Sport Handelskontor GmbH (Hamburg, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the design at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Design at issue: Registered Community design No 1664 368-0006

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 April 2019 in Case R 31/2018-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | maintain the decision of the Design Invalidity Division of EUIPO of 30 October 2017 rejecting the application for declaration of invalidity of the registered Community design No 1664 368-0006; |
| --- | --- |

—

maintain the decision of the Design Invalidity Division of EUIPO of 30 October 2017 rejecting the application for declaration of invalidity of the registered Community design No 1664 368-0006;

| — | order EUIPO and, if the other party to the proceedings before EUIPO intervenes, the intervener, to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and, if the other party to the proceedings before EUIPO intervenes, the intervener, to bear the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 62 of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 62 of Council Regulation (EC) No 6/2002.

---
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 238 

Designating the third week in January 2012 as ‘‘Teen Cancer Awareness 

Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 26, 2011 

Mr. MENENDEZ submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Designating the third week in January 2012 as ‘‘Teen 

Cancer Awareness Week’’. 

Whereas cancer among adolescents is rare, but is still the 

leading cause of death from disease in teenagers between 

15 and 19 years of age; 

Whereas teen cancer patients receive treatment at a number 

of different medical establishments, including pediatric 

hospitals, pediatric oncology centers, and adult cancer facilities; 

Whereas teen cancer patients may feel out of place in any of 

these settings if their clinical and psychosocial needs are 

not met; 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 238 IS 

Whereas 40 percent of cancer patients aged 14 and younger 

are enrolled in clinical trials, compared with only 9 percent of cancer patients between the ages of 15 and 24; 

Whereas teens with cancer have unique concerns about their 

education, social lives, body image, and infertility, among 

other concerns, and their needs may be misunderstood or 

unacknowledged; 

Whereas many adolescent cancer survivors have difficulty readjusting to school and social settings, and experience 

anxiety, and in some cases face increased learning difficulties; and 

Whereas there exists an undeniable need not only to understand the biological and clinical needs of teens with cancer, and to seek the prevention of cancer in teens, but 

also to increase awareness in the larger community about 

the unique challenges facing teens with cancer: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate designates the third week 

2 in January 2012 as ‘‘Teen Cancer Awareness Week’’ in 

3 order to promote awareness about teen cancers and the 

4 unique medical and social needs of teens with cancer. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS