alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010063EN.01002601.xml

| 13.3.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/26

---

Action brought on 17 December 2009 — European Commission v Republic of Estonia

(Case C-527/09)

2010/C 63/43

Language of the case: Estonian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by G. Braun and E. Randvere, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Estonia

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by failing to adopt the provisions necessary to transpose Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC and repealing Council Directive 84/253/EEC, (1) and by failing to inform the Commission thereof, the Republic of Estonia has failed to fulfil its obligations under the directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to adopt the provisions necessary to transpose Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, amending Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC and repealing Council Directive 84/253/EEC, (1) and by failing to inform the Commission thereof, the Republic of Estonia has failed to fulfil its obligations under the directive;

1

| — | order the Republic of Estonia to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Estonia to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The time-limit for transposition of the directive into national law expired on 29 June 2008.

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 157, p. 87.

1

---
Order filed, January 28, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-14-00959-CR

____________

GERALINE GREGORY LINCOLN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 337th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1424406

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due January 20, 2015. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the 

record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record 

has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Mary Ann Rodriguez, the official court reporter, to file the 

record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
## United States Court of Appeals **For the Eighth Circuit**

___________________________
No. 18

- 3232

___________________________
United States of America

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

Derrill Watt

Defendant

- Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

- St. Louis

____________
Submitted: July 15, 2019 Filed: July 22, 2019 [Unpublished]

____________
Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM

.

Derrill Watt pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm he knew was stolen , 18 U.S.C. § 922(j) . As part of his plea agreement, he waived his right to appeal his sentence unless it exceeded his Sentencing Guidelines range. T he 80

- month- 2

- sentence the district court 1 imposed was below his 84

- to 105

- month Guidelines
range

. In an Anders brief, Watt’s counsel requests permission to withdraw and identifies the applicability of a four

- level Guidelines enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with another felony offense as a n issue on appeal

. See U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B); s ee also Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). In

a pro se brief, Watt makes the same argument.

We review the validity and applicability of an appeal waiver de novo. See United States v. Scott , 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010). Upon careful review, we conclude that the appeal waiver is enforceable and that it is applicable to the issue raised on appeal. See United States v. Andis , 333 F.3d 886, 889

– 92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (explaining th at an appeal waiver will be enforced if the appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into the plea agreement and the waiver, and enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice). We hav e also independently reviewed the record and conclude that no other non

- frivolous issues exist. See Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988 )

. Accordingly , we dismiss the appeal and grant counsel permission to withdraw.

______________________________ ___________ ______

1 The Honorable Ronnie L. White, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [NAFTA-4742]

                    In accordance with Section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2273), the Department of Labor issued a Certification Regarding Eligibility to Apply for NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance on April 30, 2001, applicable to workers at Grove U.S., LLC, producing scissor aerial work platforms in Shady Grove, Pennsylvania. The notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on May 18, 2001 (66 FR 27691).                

At the request of State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers produce aerial work platforms. New information provided by the company show that workers of the subject firm are not separately identifiable by product line.

The intent of the certification is to provide coverage to all workers of the subject firm impacted by increased imports from Canada of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by the workers' firm. Therefore, the Department is amending the certification to provide coverage to all workers separated from employment at the subject firm, and not limit the coverage to those workers producing scissor aerial work platforms.

The amended notice applicable to NAFTA-4272 is hereby issued as follows:

All workers of Grove U.S. LLC, Shady Grove, Pennsylvania, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after March 28, 2000, through April 30, 2003, are eligible to apply for NAFTA-TAA under Section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 6th day of June 2001.

Edward A. Tomchick,

Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. 01-16152  Filed 6-26-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
**Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 9 March 2010 – hofherr communikation v OHIM (NATURE WATCH)**

**(Case T-77/09)**

Community trade mark – International registration designating the European Community – Word mark NATURE WATCH – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of goods (Council Regulation
No 40/94, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 23, 39)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 December 2008 (Case R 1410/2008-1) concerning the international registration, designating the European Community, of the word sign NATURE WATCH. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | hofherr communikation GmbH |
| Community trade mark sought: | Word mark NATURE WATCH for goods and services in Classes 9, 39, 41 and 43 – international registration No WOO957541 |
| Decision of the examiner: | Registration refused |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

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

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders hofherr communikation GmbH to pay the costs. |
Hiram Lebron FIGUEROA, petitioner, v. Kevin KAUFFMAN, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Huntingdon, et al.

No. 17-7355.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of K & F Industries, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dirkson
R. Charles, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

         (1) The Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

/s/ DIRKSON R. CHARLES
-----------------------
Dirkson R. Charles
Chief Financial Officer
July 31, 2003
# C_2011347EN.01002803.xml

| 26.11.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/28

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2011 — Purvis v Parliament

(Case T-439/09) (1)

1

(Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to Members of the European Parliament - Additional pension scheme - Refusal to grant a voluntary additional pension in part in the form of a lump sum - Plea of illegality - Acquired rights - Legitimate expectations - Proportionality)

2011/C 347/44

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: John Robert Purvis (Saint Andrews, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: initially, H. Krück, A. Pospíšilová Padowska and G. Corstens and subsequently, N. Lorenz, A. Pospíšilová Padowska and G. Corstens, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the European Parliament’s decision of 7 August 2009, which refused to grant the applicant his voluntary additional pension in part in the form of a lump sum

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders John Robert Purvis to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders John Robert Purvis to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 11, 16.1.2010.

1

---
VICTAULIC COMPANY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, ex rel. CUSTOMS FRAUD INVESTIGATIONS, LLC.

No. 16-1398.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
# C_2009220EN.01003701.xml

| 12.9.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 220/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.9.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 220/37

---

Action brought on 14 July 2009 — Sobieski zu Schwarzenberg v OHIM — British-American Tobacco Polska (Romuald Prinz Sobieski zu Schwarzenberg)

(Case T-271/09)

2009/C 220/78

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Romuald Prinz Sobieski zu Schwarzenberg (Dortmund, Germany) (represented by: U. Fitzner and U. Fitzner, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: British-American Tobacco Polska S.A. (Augustów, Poland)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs — OHIM) of 13 May 2009 (Appeal case R 771/2008-4); |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs — OHIM) of 13 May 2009 (Appeal case R 771/2008-4);

| — | annul the decision of the Opposition Division of 14 March 2008; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Opposition Division of 14 March 2008; and

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark ‘Romuald Prinz Sobieski zu Schwarzenberg’ for goods in Classes 33 and 34 (application No 4 583 761)

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: British-American Tobacco Polska S.A.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the Polish word mark ‘JAN III SOBIESKI’ for goods in Classes 34 (No 110 327) and the Polish word and figurative mark ‘JAN III SOBIESKI’ for goods in Classes 3, 30, 32 and 33 (No 160 417). The opposition concerns registration in Classes 33 and 34

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: acceptance of the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: infringement of Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1) in conjunction with Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 (2) and of Article 60 in conjunction with Article 81 of Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

1

2

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1)

1

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 of 13 December 1995 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 33)

2

---
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER WITHDRAWING MEDIATION ORDER

Cause number: 01-17-00551-CV

Style: Jacobs Field Services North America, Inc., Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.,

and Jacobs Engineering, Inc. v. Troy Willeford

Date motion filed: December 19, 2017

Type of Motion: Objection to Mediation

Party filing motion: Appellants

It is ordered that Appellants’ objection to mediation is granted. We withdraw our 

Mediation Order dated December 12, 2017. This case will be set for submission at a later date.

Judge's signature: /s/ Russell Lloyd

  Acting individually 

 

Date: December 21, 2017
|   | (1) | the      Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Oconee Financial Corporation (the      “Company”) for the annual period ended December 31, 2007 (the “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 Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ B. Amrey      Harden                                  B. AmreyHardenPresident and Chief Executive      Officer |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**Exhibit 14.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of Directors andStockholders 

CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V.: 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in (i) the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-13970) of CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V., (ii) theRegistration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-83962) of CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V., (iii) the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-86090) of CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V., (iv) the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No.333-128657) of CEMEX,S.A.B. de C.V. and (v) the Registration Statement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-161787) of CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. of our reports dated April 27, 2012, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. and subsidiaries (the Company)as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 and January 1, 2010, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011, which reports appear in the December 31, 2011 Annual Report on Form 20-F of CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. 

KPMG Cárdenas Dosal, S.C. 

/s/ Celin Zorrilla Rizo 

Monterrey, N.L., Mexico 

April 27, 2012
John F. CURRAN, III, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17M91.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
# C_2009167EN.01001701.xml

| 18.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/17

---

Action brought on 12 May 2009 — Poloplast v OHIM — Polypipe Building Products (P)

(Case T-189/09)

2009/C 167/33

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Poloplast GmbH & Co KG (Leonding, Austria) (represented by: G. Bruckmüller, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Polypipe Building Products Ltd (Edlington, United Kingdom)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the contested decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 25 February 2009 or alter it in such a way that it establishes that there is no likelihood of confusion between the markets covered, and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the contested decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 25 February 2009 or alter it in such a way that it establishes that there is no likelihood of confusion between the markets covered, and

| — | Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the applicant’s costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Poloplast GmbH & Co KG.

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark ‘p’ for goods and services in Classes 6, 11, 17, 19 and 42 (application No 3 148 194).

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Polypipe Building Products Ltd.

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the figurative mark ‘P’ for goods in Class 17 (Community trade mark No 33 191) and the figurative mark ‘P POLYPIPE’ for goods in Classes 6, 11, 17, 19 and 20 (Community trade mark No 2 685 691).

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition.

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partial dismissal of the appeal.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (1)), as there is no likelihood of confusion between the two marks at issue.

Pleas in law:

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

1

---
In Re Masao YONAMINE, petitioner.

No. 17-6939.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
# C_2011160EN.01002102.xml

| 28.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 160/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 160/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 April 2011 — Smart Technologies v OHIM (WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH)

(Case T-523/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2011/C 160/32

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Smart Technologies ULC (Calgary, Canada) (represented by: M. Edenborough, QC, T. Elias, Barrister, and R. Harrison, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 29 September 2009 (Case R 554/2009-2), concerning an application for the word sign WIR MACHEN DAS BESONDERE EINFACH as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders Smart Technologies ULC to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Smart Technologies ULC to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 51, 27.2.2010.

1

---