alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This memorandum opinion was not selected for pub lication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 SHIRLEY M. CLARK, 2 Trustee of the Ronald B. Clark 3 and Shirley M. Clark Living Trust 4 Dated December 4, 1991, 5 Plaintiff-Appellee, 6
v. NO. 35,656 7 CORGEOS, LLC, a New Mexico 8 Limited Liability Company, and 9 ROBERT G. SAHD, 10 Defendants-Appellants. 11 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY 12 Alan M. Malott, District Judge 13 Hunt & Davis PC 14 Julie J. Vargas 15 Albuquerque, NM 16 for Appellee 17 Leverick & Musselman, LLC 18 Richard M. Leverick 19 Albuquerque, NM 20 for Appellants 212 MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 WECHSLER, Judge. 2 {1} Summary affirmance was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of 3 proposed summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary affirmance has 4 been filed and the time for doing so has expired. 5 {2} Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated in our calendar notice. 6 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 7

__________________________________ 8 JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge 9 WE CONCUR: 10

_________________________________ 11 M. MONICA ZAMORA, Judge 12

_________________________________ 13 STEPHEN G. FRENCH, Judge 14
----

Euro exchange rates (1)

27 January 2006

(2006/C 21/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----
Exhibit
      32.1








**CERTIFICATIONS
      PURSUANT TO**


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


**(18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**











In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of IBSG International, Inc. (the "Company")
      on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael
      Rivers, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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


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


Date:
                  August 14, 2006
              By:
              /s/ Michael
                RiversMichael
                RiversPresident,
                  Chief Executive Officer
#### STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY, Respondent, v. MATTHEWS et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November 8, 1907.)

Action by the State Board of Pharmacy against Gardiner D. Matthews and another. B. B. Wise, for appellants. H. A. Herold, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Determination affirmed, with costs. Judgment ordered .for plaintiff, with costs. Order filed. See 52 Misc. Rep. 492, 102 N. Y. Supp. 507.

LAUGHLIN and HOUGHTON, JJ., dissent.
# C_2005217EN.01004001.xml

| 3.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/40

---

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 20 June 2005

in Case T-361/02 Deutsche Bahn AG v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(State aid - Competitor's complaint - Action for failure to act - Position taken - Manifest inadmissibility)

(2005/C 217/88)

Language of the case: German

In Case T-361/02: Deutsche Bahn AG, established in Berlin (Germany), represented by M. Schütte, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg, against Commission of the European Communities (Agents: V. Kreuschitz and V. Di Bucci, with an address for service in Luxembourg), supported by the Council of the European Union (Agents: A.-M. Colaert and F. Florindo Gijón) — action for failure to act, seeking a declaration that the Commission unlawfully failed to adopt a decision on the applicant's complaint of 5 July 2002 — the Court of First Instance (First Chamber, Extended Composition), composed of B. Vesterdorf, President, J.D. Cook, R. García-Valdecasas, I. Labucka and V. Trstenjak, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, made an order on 20 June 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | The application is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | The applicant, in addition to bearing its own costs, shall pay those incurred by the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant, in addition to bearing its own costs, shall pay those incurred by the Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 44 of 22.2.2003

1

---
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

For the Fifth Circuit

No. 98-20826

Summary Calendar

C. EARLINE BEAM,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

PASADENA INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(H-97-CV-1594)

March 16, 1999

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:*

C. Earline Beam ("Beam") sued her former employer, Pasadena

Independent School District ("PISD"), in May 1997, alleging claims

against PISD for sex discrimination and/or retaliation under 42

U.S.C. § 2000-e ("Title VII"); for age discrimination under the Age

Discrimination and Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 621, et seq.

("ADEA"); and for due process violations under the Fourteenth

Amendment. In February 1998, PISD moved for partial summary
2

judgment and Beam withdrew her age discrimination and due process

claims. PISD then moved for summary judgment on Beam’s remaining

claims and the district judge granted summary judgment dismissing

all of Beam’s claims. Beam timely filed this appeal.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts and

relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons stated by

the district judge in her Memorandum Opinion and Order entered

August 7, 1998, we AFFIRM the Final Judgment entered on the same

date which grants PISD’s motion for summary judgment.

AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Montford J. Leonard, Also Known as John Montford Leonard, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Sedita, J.—violation of probation.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr, Boomer and Pine, JJ.
# C_2021297EN.01003801.xml

| 26.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/38

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 June 2021 — FJ and Others v EEAS

(Case T-698/19) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Remuneration - EEAS staff posted to a third country - Update of the correction coefficients - Manifest error of assessment - Retroactive effect - Legal certainty - Duty to have regard for the welfare of officials)

(2021/C 297/45)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: FJ and the 8 other applicants whose names appear in the annex to the judgment (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European External Action Service (represented by: S. Marquardt and R. Spáč, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 270 TFEU for annulment of the decision drawing up the applicants’ salary slip for December 2018 to the extent that it applied, for the first time, new correction coefficients applicable to their remuneration, with retroactive effect from 1 February 2018.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders FJ and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders FJ and the other applicants whose names appear in the annex to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 406, 2.12.2019.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          34,768
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,250
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               767,018
<PP&E>                                         867,356
<DEPRECIATION>                                 103,954
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,674,617
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,653,286
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     53,427
<COMMON>                                       182,325
<OTHER-SE>                                    (92,652)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,674,617
<SALES>                                      1,243,145
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,243,145
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,981,542
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               645,758
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             381,654
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,598,898)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   661,824
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,260,722)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                380,260
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,640,982)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.18)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-1815

CHRISTOPHER J. ODINKEMELU,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

CONSOLIDATED STORES CORPORATION, d/b/a Big

Lots Stores,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

JORJIA WILLIAMS,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,

District Judge. (CA-95-826-2)

Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: November 16, 1998

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher J. Odinkemelu, Appellant Pro Se. Peter George Pappas,

Larry I. Moore, III, ADAMS, KLEEMEIER, HAGAN, HANNAH & FOUTS,

Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Odinkemelu appeals the district court’s order

granting the Defendant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law on

his complaint alleging employment discrimination. We have reviewed

the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Odinkemelu v. Consolidated Stores, No. CA-95-826-2 (M.D.N.C.

May 5, 1998). 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
Case: 1:03-cv-01181 Document #: 38 Filed: 06/21/05 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:204
Case: 1:03-cv-01181 Document #: 38 Filed: 06/21/05 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:205
Case: 1:03-cv-01181 Document #: 38 Filed: 06/21/05 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:206
Case: 1:03-cv-01181 Document #: 38 Filed: 06/21/05 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:207
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1684
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 2 of 9 PageID #:1685
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 3 of 9 PageID #:1686
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 4 of 9 PageID #:1687
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 5 of 9 PageID #:1688
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 6 of 9 PageID #:1689
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 7 of 9 PageID #:1690
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 8 of 9 PageID #:1691
Case: 1:02-cv-08700 Document #: 326 Filed: 09/16/11 Page 9 of 9 PageID #:1692
Exhibit 10.2.1

                             AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
                              VISUAL NETWORKS, INC.
                             1997 OMNIBUS STOCK PLAN

                                   WITNESSETH:

      WHEREAS, Section 7(e) of the Visual Networks, Inc. 1997 Omnibus Stock Plan
(the "1997 Plan") authorizes the Board of Directors (the "Board") of Visual
Networks, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), to amend the Plan at
any time; and

      WHEREAS, the Board now finds it desirable and in the best interests of the
Corporation to amend the Plan to allow for the regrant of certain shares of
common stock of the Corporation, par value $0.01 per share ("Common Stock")
under the 1997 Plan.

      NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is amended as follows:

                              First and Only Change

      Section 8 of the Plan is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

      8. Additional Shares

            In addition to Common Stock reserved under Section 4 of the Plan,
2,000,000 shares of Common Stock shall be reserved for Awards granted under the
Plan to eligible persons who are not officers or directors within the meaning of
the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) Marketplace Rule
4310(c)(25)(H), provided, however, that no Award with respect to such shares
shall be deemed to be an incentive stock option. If any Award granted with
respect to shares of Common Stock reserved and authorized for issuance pursuant
to this Section 8 is forfeited or terminates for any reason before being
exercised, the corresponding shares of Common Stock shall be available for
subsequent Awards under the Plan, with the exception of incentive stock options,
to eligible persons who are not officers or directors within the meaning of NASD
Marketplace Rule 43 10(c)(25)(H). The provisions of this Section 8 shall be
subject to adjustment pursuant to Section 7(d). Awards with respect to shares of
Common Stock received and authorized pursuant to this Section 8 shall not be
taken into account for purposes of the limitations of Section 4.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Amendment to be
executed by its duly authorized officer this 15th day of January, 2003.

ATTEST:                             VISUAL NETWORKS, INC.


By: /s/ Nancy Spangler              By: /s/ Peter J. Minihane
   --------------------------          -------------------------
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

LITETRONICS INTERNATIONAL, 

INC. and COOLLITE INTERNATIONAL 

HOLDINGS LIMITED, 

 Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

TECHNICAL CONSUMER PRODUCTS, 

INC., 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 03C5733 

Judge Wayne R. Andersen 

Magistrate Judge Ashman 

 

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE 

 Pursuant to Federal Civil Rule 41(a)(1)(ii), Plaintiffs Litetronics International, Inc. and 

CoolLite International Holdings Limited and Defendant Technical Consumer Products, Inc. 

hereby agree to voluntarily dismiss, with prejudice, the claims in the Complaint and the 

Counterclaims, with each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Kevin R. Krantz 

Kevin R. Krantz 

STAHL COWEN CROWLEY LLC

55 West Monroe 

Suite 1200 

Chicago, IL 60603 

Attorney for Plaintiff Litetronics 

International, Inc. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Steven M. Auvil 

Steven M. Auvil (0063827) 

Craig L. Moore (0063550) 

BENESCH, FRIEDLANDER, COPLAN & 

ARONOFF, LLP

2300 BP Tower 

200 Public Square 

Cleveland, OH 44114-2378 

Telephone: (216)363-4500 

Facsimile: (216)363-4588 

sauvil@bfca.com;cmoore@bfca.com 

Case: 1:03-cv-05733 Document #: 155 Filed: 05/21/07 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:603
/s/ 

Anthony Nimmo (Reg. No. 6195174) 

Brian Lum (Reg. No. 6256315) 

ICE MILLER LLP 

200 W. Madison Street, Suite 3500 

Chicago, IL 60606-3417 

Telephone: (312) 726-1567 

Facsimile: (312) 726-7102 

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim 

Defendant CoolLite International Holdings 

Limited 

Leon E. Lindenbaum 

KURLANDER & ASSOCIATES 

155 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 620 

Chicago, IL 60601 

Telephone: 312-616-4246 

Facsimile: 312-729-5379 

E-mail: Leonbon1@comcast.net 

Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimplaintiff Technical Consumer Products, Inc.

 Doc 1442652 Ver 1 

Case: 1:03-cv-05733 Document #: 155 Filed: 05/21/07 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:604
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 14

- 00169

- CV

SHILOH ENTERPRISES, INC.

, Appellant

v.

FREP NEW BRAUNFELS, L.L.C.

, Appellee

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2008

- CI

- 10605 Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI

, JUSTICE MARION , AND JUSTICE BARNARD

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is set aside and the case is remanded to the trial court for r endition of judgment in accordance with the parties’ agreement. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B). Costs of appeal are taxed against the party who incurred them. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(d).

SIGNED October 8, 2014.

_____________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.01 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Matthew R. Perry, certify, to the best of my knowledge, that based upon a review of the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Transmeta Corporation, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004
(the Form 10-K), the Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Form 10-K
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Transmeta Corporation for the annual period covered by the Form 10-K. Date: March 28, 2005
By: /s/ Matthew R. Perry
President and Chief Executive Officer,
Transmeta Corporation A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Transmeta Corporation and will be retained by Transmeta Corporation and furnished to the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-22-00788-CV

Ji HYUN,

Appellant

v.

DNOW L.P., d/b/a DistributionNOW and Marley Wiles,

Appellees

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021-CI-11226

Honorable Cathleen M. Stryker, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE CHAPA, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED WITH 

PREJUDICE. We tax costs of court against the party that incurred them. 

SIGNED March 20, 2024.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
# C_2019164EN.01005901.xml

| 13.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 164/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 164/59

---

Action brought on 18 March 2019 — Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft v EUIPO (eVoter)

(Case T-175/19)

(2019/C 164/62)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft eV (Munich, Germany) (represented by: L. Grenz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Registration of EU word mark eVoter — Registration No 17 900 152

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2019 in Case R 1983/2018-5

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, including those incurred those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs, including those incurred those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Breach of EUIPO’s administrative practice; |
| --- | --- |

—

Breach of EUIPO’s administrative practice;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1054

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to establish, for purposes

of disability determinations under such title, a uniform minimum level

of earnings, for demonstrating ability to engage in substantial gainful

activity, at the level currently applicable solely to blind individuals.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 23, 1997

Mr. COCHRAN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend title II of the Social Security Act to establish,

for purposes of disability determinations under such title,

a uniform minimum level of earnings, for demonstrating

ability to engage in substantial gainful activity, at the

level currently applicable solely to blind individuals.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. UNIFORM MINIMUM LEVEL OF EARNINGS FOR

4 DEMONSTRATING ABILITY TO ENGAGE IN

5 SUBSTANTIAL GAINFUL ACTIVITY.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 223(d)(4) of the Social

7 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 423(d)(4)) is amended, in the sec-
2

•S 1054 IS

1 ond sentence, by striking ‘‘No individual who is blind shall

2 be regarded’’ and inserting ‘‘No individual shall be re3 garded’’.

4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

5 this section shall apply to monthly insurance benefits for

6 months after December 1997.

Æ