alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Earl Hughes BURGEST, petitioner, v. Charles A. DANIELS, Warden.

No. 17-7795.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Reginald S. CURTIS, petitioner, v. Paul S. KEMPER, Warden.

No. 17-5359.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Rasheen WESTON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5965.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 2, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Roger Lee BROWER, petitioner, v. MICHIGAN.

No. 17-8273.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
Juan William RIVERA, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 17-8285.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 4, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
# C_2010234EN.01003602.xml

| 28.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 234/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/36

---

Order of the General Court of 8 July 2010 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case T-166/09 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Civil Service - Officials - Order of referral - Decision which cannot be the object of an appeal - Action for damages - Pre-litigation procedure - Procedural defects - Appeal in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded)

2010/C 234/65

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Berardis-Kayser, acting as Agents, and A. dal Ferro, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal lodged against the order of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 18 February 2009 in Case F-70/07 Marcuccio v Commission ECR-SC 0000, seeking the annulment of that order

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Luigi Marcuccio shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Luigi Marcuccio shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 141, 20.6.2009.

1

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

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           5,308
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           9,570
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                23,205
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     46,308
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          11,557
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            11,658
<LOANS>                                        276,936
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,383
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 381,128
<DEPOSITS>                                     293,349
<SHORT-TERM>                                    17,621
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,556
<LONG-TERM>                                     31,617
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,449
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,536
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 381,128
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  5,650
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,340
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 6,990
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,112
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,771
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,219
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       45
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 211
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,989
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,571
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,571
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,099
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .44
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.65
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,192
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,479
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,414
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       80
<RECOVERIES>                                         4
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,383
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,401
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,982
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit
      32.1**


Herborium
      Group,
      Inc.


**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 Herborium Group, Inc. (the Company) on
      Form
      10-KSB for the period ended November 30, 2006 as filed with the SEC on the
      date
      hereof (the Report), I, Agnes Olszewski, Chief Executive Officer and 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.




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





Date:
      March 29, 2007








*/s/
      Dr. Agnes P. Olszewski*


*Dr.
      Agnes P. Olszewski*


*Chief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) and*


*Chief
      Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)*
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2



                                AMENDMENT TO THE

                        1993 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

                            OF SONICblue INCORPORATED

        THIS AMENDMENT amends the 1993 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of SONICblue
Incorporated (the "Company"), as last amended as of May 18, 1998 (the "Plan").
Unless specifically otherwise defined, each term used herein shall have the
meaning assigned to such term in the Plan.

                                   WITNESSETH:

        WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has determined that it is in the best
interests of the Company to amend the Plan to increase the number of shares
authorized for issuance thereunder:

        NOW THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

        1.     Stock Subject to the Plan.

               1.1    Section 3 of the Plan shall be amended by deleting the
        section in its entirety and replacing it with the following:

               "The maximum aggregate number of shares which may be offered
        under the Plan shall be 4,800,000 shares of stock, subject to adjustment
        as provided in Section 14 hereof."

        2.     Date of Amendment. To record the adoption of this Amendment to
the Plan by the Board of Directors as of February 22, 2000 and the approval by
the stockholders of this Amendment on May 26, 2000, the Company has caused its
authorized officer to execute the same.

                                        SONICblue INCORPORATED

                                        By  /s/ Kenneth F. Potashner
                                            ---------------------------------
                                        Kenneth F. Potashner

                                        As its Chief Executive Officer





                                       39
___________

No. 95-2184

___________

James McGuire, *

 *

Appellee, *

 *

v. *

 *

Dora Schriro; Michael L. Kemna, *

 *

Defendants, *

 *

Correctional Medical Services, *

Agency for the Missouri * Appeal from the United States

Department of Corrections, St. * District Court for the

Louis, MO, * Western District of Missouri.

 *

Appellant, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

John Langland, CMS Administrator,*

 *

Defendant, *

 *

Mary Lou Wilson; Diane Schmille; *

Dr. John Matthews, CMS Medical *

Examiner, *

 *

Appellants. *

___________

 Submitted: May 1, 1996

 Filed: May 21, 1996

___________

Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

James McGuire, an inmate at Western Missouri Correctional Center

(WMCC), brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against, among others,

Correctional Medical Systems (CMS) and various CMS personnel

("defendants"). McGuire claimed defendants acted with deliberate

indifference to his serious medical need by delaying for 
 The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge 1

for the Western District of Missouri.

-2-

several months the surgical repair of his hernia. Defendants moved for

summary judgment and argued they were entitled to qualified immunity.

McGuire opposed the motion. The district court denied the motion,

1

concluding defendants were not entitled to summary judgment based on

qualified immunity because genuine issues of material fact existed

regarding their roles in McGuire's medical treatment, and McGuire had

alleged the violation of a clearly established constitutional right.

Defendants appeal. 

An order denying a motion for summary judgment based on qualified

immunity may be final and appealable depending on the issue appealed.

Johnson v. Jones, 115 S. Ct. 2151, 2154-55 (1995). If the issue concerns

whether a certain point of law is clearly established, or whether

reasonable officials would have known based on the facts available to them

that their actions violated the law, the order is immediately appealable.

Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 528-30 (1985); Reece v. Groose, 60 F.3d

487, 489 (8th Cir. 1995). If, on the other hand, the issue on appeal is

whether the pretrial record creates a genuine issue of material fact as to

the occurrence of particular conduct, the order is not immediately

appealable. Behrens v. Pelletier, 116 S. Ct. 834, 842 (1996); Johnson v.

Jones, 115 S. Ct. at 2158-59.

We agree with the district court that this appeal falls within this

latter category. Accordingly, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           7,102
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,863
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (9,410)
<INVENTORY>                                     31,386
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                76,498
<PP&E>                                          32,905
<DEPRECIATION>                                (23,500)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 107,193
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          142,857
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                    (35,710)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   107,193
<SALES>                                         41,824
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                41,824
<CGS>                                           19,814
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,814
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                17,995
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,889
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,126
<INCOME-TAX>                                       627
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                499
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       499
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21


</TABLE>
Kevin DIAZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5146.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.1

                            [WESTPOINT STEVENS LOGO]

Thomas J. Ward
President and Chief Operating Officer

                                       March 21, 2000


PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
Mr. William F. Crumley
WestPoint Stevens Inc.
Post Office Box 71
West Point, Georgia 31833

Dear Bill:

         You have indicated that you would like to avoid the daily
responsibilities associated with your present position as Executive Vice
President-Operations of WestPoint Stevens Inc., and in response thereto, I have
proposed the following arrangement with respect to your employment by the
Company until you retire January 1, 2001.

         1.       Effective May 1, 2000, you will serve as a special advisor to
the President, reporting directly to me, however, you will no longer be an
executive officer of the Company. As such, you will have no daily
responsibilities but will be available, as needed, to assist me with special
projects.

         2.       From May 1, 2000, through December 31, 2000, you will be paid
your regular base salary and you will be eligible for all your current benefits.
Your cash bonus and stock bonus for 2000, if earned, will be prorated through
April 30, 2000.

         3.       In recognition of your faithful service and many contributions
to the Company the unvested portion of all of your stock options and earned
stock bonus awards shall become fully vested and non forfeitable effective
January 1, 2001.

         You will enter into your retirement from the Company on January 1, 2001
and no other obligation shall exist between you or the Company.

         If this is agreeable to you, please so indicate by signing this letter
below.

                                                 Sincerely,

                                                 /s/ THOMAS J. WARD

                                                 Thomas J. Ward
/psb

Agreed:

 /s/ William F. Crumley
-------------------------------
William F. Crumley
Randall BINGHAM, petitioner, v. Don BLAKELY, Warden.

No. 17-6565.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 21, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Andy BUXTON, petitioner, v. Brian H. THOMPSON, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Mercer, et al.

No. 17-8239.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
# C_2010024EN.01006901.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/69 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/69

---

Action brought on 30 November 2009 — ATB Norte v OHIM — Bricocenter Italia (Affiliato BRICO CENTER)

(Case T-483/09)

2010/C 24/122

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ATB Norte, SL (Burgos, Spain) (represented by: P. López Ronda, G. Macías Bonilla, H.L. Curtis-Oliver and G. Marín Raigal, 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: Bricocenter Italia Srl (Rozzano Milanofiori (Milan), Italy)

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 OHIM of 28 September 2009 — R 1048/2008-4. |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 September 2009 — R 1048/2008-4.

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Bricocenter S.r.l.

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘Affiliato BRICOCENTER’ (Application No 4 939 344) in respect of services in Class 35.

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: ATB Norte, SL.

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Figurative Community trade marks containing the word elements ‘CENTROS DE BRICOLAGE BRICOCENTRO’ (No 3 262 623) and ‘ATB CENTROS DE BRICOLAGE BRICOCENTRO’ (No 989 046) in respect of services in Classes 35, 37 and 39.

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld.

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Opposition Division’s decision annulled and the opposition rejected in its entirety.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Incorrect interpretation and application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---
Demetrick MOSS, petitioner, v. Connie HORTON, Warden.

No. 17-5034.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Honorable Tm Swy 

county Attorney 

Amarillo, Texar 

Dear Sir: 

we reoeived your lot 

our opinion In 

other etatute 

firemen and 

ode or any 

employment of 

over 30,000 

habitants?” 

the houra of employment 

, Penal Code, Seoy fire department or 

olty of more than twentyhabitant8 rhall be rety for more than sir (0) days 

all be unlawful ior any city of 

ty-five thousand (76,000) lnhable or permit any auoh ilremen and 

polioomen to work more than twelve (1.2) hours 

per oalendar day or more than sevent 

9 

-tro (7Z) 

hours in any one oalendar week and n no event, 

more than one hundred forty-tour (i44) hours In 

any two (2) oonseoutlve oalendar weeks ln the 

dirohargo of their dutlea exoept In oese of @norgenoy whloh may arise where it ma beoome neoe8- 

sax-y to work more than twelve (18 3 hour8 per Oalendar day or more than seventy-two (7E) hours in 

.- ..__.. _- -._-_ .--.__. I- 
Hon. Tom hay, Pa’age 2. 

any one calendar week or more then one hundred fortyfour (144) hours in any two (2) oonsecutlve calender 

weeke for the proteotlon of property or .hume+n life; 

said firemen and polioomen shall draw eddltlonal 

oompeneatlon Sor the number of hours worked in 

addition to the regular twelve (12) hour oelender 

day, or more then the regular seventy-two (72) hours 

In any one oalender week or more then the regular 

one hundred forty-rour (144) hours in any two (2) 

ooneecutlve oeldnder weeks or If required to work 

on any day whloh has been designated as the day 

of the week that such member of said department 

should not be required to be on duty, additional 

oompeneatlon et the rate of time and one-half over 

time computed upon the basis of their monthly salary shall be paid to them’ for such additional time 

a8 they are required to work.” 

From a oarsful reading of the above statute it is apparent that the statute. doea not undertake to regulate the hours 

0r employment 0r firemen and polloomen In any oltlee or towns 

exoept thoee having a population of more than seventy-rive 

thousand (75,000) inhabitante. The statute has no epplloatlon to cities and towns having a population of less than 

seventy-five thousand (75,000), clnd our answer to your question, therefore, la in the negative. 

Your6 very truly 

ATTORNZ!f GENERAL OF TEXAS 

GRL:Ud 

APPROVZD AUG 24, 1939 

Gerald C. Kann (slqned) 

ATTORNEY GENEML OF TEXAS 

BY 

Glenn R. LswIs( signed) 

Assistant 

(Stamped: ) Approved 

Opinion Committee 

By: R.W.F.,Chalrmen
In Re Alashea RAA, petitioner.

No. 17-8469.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 18, 2018.

Petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition denied.
Exhibit 32.1



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



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Borland Software Corporation (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Dale L. Fuller, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the Report and results
of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Report.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ DALE L. FULLER     
|Dale L. Fuller         
|                       
|Chief Executive Officer
|                       
|May 10, 2005           



This certification accompanies this
Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended. This certification is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Report),
irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Toheeb ODOFFIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8704.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 29, 2018.

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