alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           4,599
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               5
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 2,600
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      5,262
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           2,843
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             2,796
<LOANS>                                         62,704
<ALLOWANCE>                                        405
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  81,196
<DEPOSITS>                                      70,639
<SHORT-TERM>                                     3,500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                488
<LONG-TERM>                                        373
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,006
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,150
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  81,196
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,772
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  232
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    53
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,057
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,286
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,316
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,741
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                     (49)
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,447
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    552
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         552
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       345
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .30
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    9.08
<LOANS-NON>                                         93
<LOANS-PAST>                                       331
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   431
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       21
<RECOVERIES>                                        44
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  405
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               405
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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 Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel, Adhesion Molecules in Transfusion Biology.                    

*Date:*                         January 30, 2001.                    

*Time:*                         11 AM to 5 PM.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Columbia Sheraton, 10207 Wincopin Circle, Columbia, MD 21044.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Jeffrey H. Hurst, Health Scientist Administrator, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7208, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-0303.                    

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: January 12, 2001.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 01-1636  Filed 1-19-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 21-0168

KATIE MARIE THORNTON,

 Petitioner and Appellee,

 v.

GREGORY STEVEN BALLARD,

 Respondent and Appellant.

SECOND ORDER 

OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

Marc G. Buyske, the mediator previously appointed in this matter, has notified the 

Court that he declines the appointment. Accordingly, Mr. Buyske’s order of mediator 

appointment is hereby rescinded and

IT IS ORDERED THAT David L. Nielsen, 1170 Mendocino Dr. Helena MT 59601, 

nielsen48@hotmail.com whose name appears next on the list of attorneys desiring 

appointment as mediators for Domestic Relation appeals which is maintained pursuant to 

M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the mediation process required by 

M.R.App.P., 7(5), and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 7(5)(d) 

shall run from the date of this order of appointment.

A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to the 

parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof.

DATED this 17th day of May, 2021.

Bowen Greenwood, Clerk of the Supreme Court

c: Brian James Miller, P.O. Bo9x 557, Helena, MT 59624, bmiller@mswdlaw.com

Robyn L. Weber, 221 5th Avenue, Helena, MT 59601, robyn@weberlawhelena.com

David L. Nielsen, see address above

05/17/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0168
EXHIBIT 23.3














CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM








We have issued our reports dated March 7, 2018, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Acacia Research Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of Acacia Research Corporation on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-102181, File No. 333-109352, File No. 333-119811, File No. 333-127583, File No. 333-131463, File No. 333-140280, File No. 333-144754, File No. 333-149849, File No. 333-157626, File No. 333-165110, File No. 333-172538, File No. 333-179010, File No. 333-189135, File No. 333-217878).


/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP





Newport Beach, California


April 30, 2018
# C_2011311EN.01003901.xml

| 22.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 311/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 311/39

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2011 — dm-drogerie markt v OHIM — Distribuciones Mylar (dm)

(Case T-36/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark dm - Earlier national figurative mark dm - Administrative procedure - Decisions of the Opposition Divisions - Revocation - Correction of clerical errors - Legally non-existent measure - Admissibility of appeals before the Board of Appeal - Time-limit for filing an appeal - Legitimate expectations - Articles 59, 60a, 63 and 77a of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 60, 62, 65 and 80 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Rule 53 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95)

2011/C 311/69

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG (Karlsruhe, Germany) (represented by: O. Bludovsky and C. Mellein, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by J. Novais Gonçalves and subsequently by G. Schneider, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Distribuciones Mylar, SA (Gelves, Spain)

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

Re:

Re:

Action against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 October 2008 (Case R 228/2008-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Distribuciones Mylar, SA and dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 30 October 2008 (Case R 228/2008-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Distribuciones Mylar, SA and dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG in so far as it did not declare the amended version of the Opposition Division’s decision of 16 May 2007 to be null and void; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 30 October 2008 (Case R 228/2008-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Distribuciones Mylar, SA and dm-drogerie markt GmbH & Co. KG in so far as it did not declare the amended version of the Opposition Division’s decision of 16 May 2007 to be null and void;

| 2. | Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the action;

| 3. | Orders OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders OHIM to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 82, 4.4.2009.

1

---
# C_2012109EN.01000202.xml

| 14.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 109/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/2

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 19 January 2012 — (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Ufficio del Giudice di Pace di Venafro — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Aldo Patriciello

(Case C-496/10) (1)

1

(Article 104(3), first subparagraph of the Rules of Procedure - Member of the European Parliament - Protocol on Privileges and Immunities - Article 8 - Criminal proceedings for the offence of insulting behaviour - Statements made outside the precincts of the European Parliament - Definition of expression of an opinion in the performance of parliamentary duties - Immunity - Conditions)

2012/C 109/03

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Ufficio del Giudice di Pace di Venafro

Criminal proceedings against

Criminal proceedings against

Aldo Patriciello

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Ufficio del Giudice di Pace di Venafro — Interpretation of Articles 9 and 10 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities (OJ 1967 152, p. 13) — Member of the European Parliament charged with the offence of insulting behaviour in consequence of his making false accusations against a representative of the forces of order — Definition of expression of an opinion in the performance of parliamentary duties.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

Article 8 of the Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union, annexed to the EU, FEU and EAEC Treaties, must be interpreted to the effect that a statement made by a Member of the European Parliament beyond the precincts of that institution and giving rise to prosecution in his Member State of origin for the offence of insulting behaviour, does not constitute an opinion expressed in the performance of his parliamentary duties covered by the immunity afforded by that provision unless that statement amounts to a subjective appraisal having a direct, obvious connection with the performance of those duties. It is for the court making the reference to determine whether those conditions have been satisfied in the case in the main proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 346, 18.12.2010

1

---
Arthur J. LOMAX, petitioner, v. Rick RAEMISCH, Executive Director, Colorado Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 16-9551.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
922.

#### National Bank of Brunswick *v.*Pritchard.

Certiorari, from Glynn superior court — Judge Parker. December 5, 1907.

Submitted February 17,

Decided March 16, 1908.

Rehearing denied June 17, 1908.

*Bennei & Conyers,*for plaintiff in error.

*Francis*17. *Harris,*contra.

Russell, J.

1. A garnishment in justice’s court follows the attachment under which it issues, and the garnishee is required to appear and answer at the term to which the attachment is returnable.

2. A motion to dismiss a garnishment does not reach the attachment.

*3.*If a justice’s court sits within ten days next after issuing an attachment, the attachment shall be made returnable to the next justice’s court thereafter. Civil Code, §4518. Consequently, an attachment having issued on April 19, and the next regular term of the justice’s court com•ing on April 29, the attachment was properly returnable to the May term of that court. *Jtidgmeni aflirmed.*
# C_2009113EN.01004301.xml

| 16.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 113/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 113/43

---

Action brought on 23 March 2009 — Protege International v Commission

(Case T-119/09)

2009/C 113/86

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Protege International Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Shefet, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | annul the decision adopted by the Commission on 23 January relating to a proceeding under Article 82 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/39.414 — Protégé International/Pernod Ricard). |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision adopted by the Commission on 23 January relating to a proceeding under Article 82 of the EC Treaty (Case COMP/39.414 — Protégé International/Pernod Ricard).

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant seeks annulment of the Commission decision of 23 January 2009 whereby the Commission, in making a finding of no sufficient Community interest to continue with the investigation, rejected the complaint brought by the applicant against Pernod Ricard regarding alleged abuse of dominant position committed by the latter in the Irish whiskey market consisting, first, of legal proceedings filed by Pernod Ricard against the applicant with regard to the application for registration as trade marks of ‘WILD GEESE’, ‘WILD GEESE RARE IRISH WHISKEY’ and ‘WILD GEESE IRISH SOLDIERS AND HEROS’ by the applicant and, second, in a refusal to supply.

In support of its action, the applicant claims that

| — | the legal proceedings initiated by Pernod Ricard had the aim, not of protecting Pernod Ricard’s intellectual property rights in its trade mark ‘WILD TURKEY’, since no risk of confusion exists between the opposing marks, but that of eliminating the applicant as a competitor of Pernod Ricard in the Irish whiskey market; |
| --- | --- |

—

the legal proceedings initiated by Pernod Ricard had the aim, not of protecting Pernod Ricard’s intellectual property rights in its trade mark ‘WILD TURKEY’, since no risk of confusion exists between the opposing marks, but that of eliminating the applicant as a competitor of Pernod Ricard in the Irish whiskey market;

| — | there was an abuse of dominant position when Pernod Ricard refused to provide Irish whiskey to the applicant by reason of the latter’s refusal to accept conditions restricting sale to markets approved by Pernod Ricard; |
| --- | --- |

—

there was an abuse of dominant position when Pernod Ricard refused to provide Irish whiskey to the applicant by reason of the latter’s refusal to accept conditions restricting sale to markets approved by Pernod Ricard;

| — | there is a Community interest, since the alleged abuses concern different Member States and the Community territory as a whole. |
| --- | --- |

—

there is a Community interest, since the alleged abuses concern different Member States and the Community territory as a whole.

---
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33993-33994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15917]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Fiscal Service


Surety Companies Acceptable on Federal Bonds: Termination--
Millers Mutual Insurance Association

AGENCY: Financial Management Service, Fiscal Service, Department of the 
Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is Supplement No. 17 to the Treasury Department Circular 
570; 2000 Revision, published June 30, 2000 at 65 FR 40868.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Surety Bond Branch at (202) 874-7102.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Certificate 
of Authority issued by the Treasury to the above named Company, under 
the United States Code, Title 31, Sections 9304-9308, to qualify as an 
acceptable surety on Federal bonds is terminated effective today.
    The Company was last listed as an acceptable surety on Federal 
bonds at 65 FR 40891, June 30, 2000.
    With respect to any bonds, including continuous bonds, currently in 
force with above listed Company, bond-approving officers should secure 
new bonds with acceptable sureties in those instances where a 
significant amount of liability remains outstanding. In

[[Page 33994]]

addition, in no event, should bonds that are continuous in nature be 
renewed.
    The Circular may be viewed and downloaded through the Internet at 
http://www.fms.treas.gov/c570/index.html. A hard copy may be purchased 
from the Government Printing Office (GPO), Subscription Service, 
Washington, DC, telephone (202) 512-1800. When ordering the Circular 
from GPO, use the following stock number: 048-000-00536-5.
    Questions concerning this notice may be directed to the U.S. 
Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service, Financial 
Accounting and Services Division, Surety Bond Branch, 3700 East-West 
Highway, Room 6A04, Hyattsville, MD 20782.

    Dated: June 18, 2001.
Wanda J. Rogers,
Acting Assistant Commissioner, Financial Operations, Financial 
Management Service.
[FR Doc. 01-15917 Filed 6-25-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-35-M
Ronnie Hue MONTGOMERY, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 16-9675.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Third District denied
EXHIBIT 99.1

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 Annual Report of dELiA*s Corp. on Form 10-K for the period ending February 1, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stephen I. Kahn, 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:



| |  |     |  |                                                                       
| |  | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | By: |  | /s/STEPHEN I. KAHNStephen I. Kahn
Chief Executive Officer
May 16, 2003

---

QuickLinks
Shane NEWMAN, petitioner, v. Josie GASTELO, Warden.

No. 16-9457.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Converted by EDGARwiz


INTEREST-FREE LOAN AGREEMENT

This Interest-free Loan Agreement has been entered into on November 7, 2017 at 11:00 am Eastern Standard Time at 5348 Vegas Drive, Las Vegas, NV 89108, United States of America, by and between: 

The Lender 

Natalija Tunevic, Incorporator and Director of FreeCook

The Borrower 

FreeCook, Nevada Corporation 

The undersigned agreed to the following:

LOAN AMOUNT & INTEREST

The Lender promises to loan $60,000 to the Borrower and the Borrower promises to repay tins principal amount to the Lender, with no interest payable on the unpaid. 

PAYMENT

This Loan will be repaid in full when it is financially convenient for the Borrower.

DEFAULT

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, if the Borrower defaults in the performance of any obligation under this Agreement, then the Lender may declare the principal amount owing due under this Agreement at that time to be immediately due and payable.

GOVERNING LAW

This Agreement will be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of State of Nevada.

COSTS

All costs, expenses and expenditures including, without limitation, the complete legal costs incurred by enforcing this Agreement as a result of any default by the Borrower, will be added to the principal then outstanding and will immediately be paid by the Borrower.

BINDING EFFECT

This Agreement will pass to the benefit of and be binding upon the respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and permitted assigns of the Borrower and Lender. The Borrower waives presentment for payment, notice of non-payment, protest, and notice of protest.






AMENDMENTS

This Agreement may only be amended or modified by a written instrument executed by both the Borrower and the Lender. 

SEVERABILITY

The clauses and paragraphs contained in this Agreement are intended to be read and construed independently of each other. If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, it is the parties' intent that such provision be reduced in scope by the court only to the extent deemed necessary by that court to render the provision reasonable and enforceable and the reminder of the provisions of this Agreement will in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated as a result.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Headings are inserted for the convenience of the parties only and are not to be considered when interpreting this Agreement. Words in the singular mean and include the plural and vice versa. Words in the masculine mean and include the feminine and vice versa.

ENTIRE AGREEMENT

This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and there are no further items or provisions, either oral or otherwise.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF

the parties have duly affixed their signatures on November 7, 2017.

 

 

 

  

  /s/ Natalija Tunevic   

The Lender, Incorporator and Director of FreeCook







  /s/ Natalija Tunevic   

The Borrower, Incorporator and Director of FreeCook