alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-674V 

Filed: April 30, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

PAULA ROSSELET, 

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Tetanus Diphtheria acellular 

Pertussis (Tdap) Vaccine; Measles 

Mumps Rubella (MMR) Vaccine;; 

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA)

Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.

Daniel Anthony Principato, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for 

respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On May 11, 2018, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National 

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the “Vaccine 

Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine 

administration (“SIRVA”) following receipt of influenza (“flu”), tetanus, diphtheria 

acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) and measles mumps and rubella (“MMR”) vaccinations on 

January 23, 2017. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit 

of the Office of Special Masters.

 

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This 

means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine 

Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the 

disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned 

agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from 

public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this 

case, undersigned is required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in 

accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management 

and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. 
On April 29, 2019, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent concludes that petitioner’s medical course is consistent 

with a SIRVA as defined by the Vaccine Injury Table Id. at 3. Respondent further 

agrees that petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the 

Vaccine Act. Id. at 3-4. 

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

 Chief Special Master
##### 



BUSINESS OBJECTS S.A.
 CHANGE OF CONTROL SEVERANCE AGREEMENT
 
 RECITALS
     AGREEMENT
  Term of Agreement
 At-Will Employment




---



##### 



Severance Benefits
 Involuntary Termination Other than for Cause or Voluntary Termination for Good Reason
Following a Change of Control
 Severance Payment
 Options; Restricted Stock, Other Equity Compensation
 Continued Employee Benefits
  -2-




---



##### 



Timing of Severance Payments
 Voluntary Resignation; Termination for Cause
 Termination Apart from Change of Control
 Exclusive Remedy
 Non-Competition/Non-Solicitation
 Non-Competition
  -3-




---



##### 



Non-Solicitation
   Understanding of Covenants
 Remedy for Breach
    -4-




---



##### 



Golden Parachute Excise Tax Best Results
 (i)
    
    delivered in full, or(ii)
    
    delivered as to such lesser extent which would result in no
portion of such severance benefits being subject to excise tax under Section
4999 of the Code,
  Definition of Terms
 Cause nolo
contendere
 Change of Control
   -5-




---



##### 



Good Reason
 Successors
 The Companys Successors
  -6-




---



##### 



The Employees Successors
 Notice
 General
 Notice of Termination
 Miscellaneous Provisions
 Code Section 409A
 No Duty to Mitigate
 Waiver
  -7-




---



##### 



Headings
 Entire Agreement
 Termination of [ ] Agreement
 Choice of Law
 Severability
 Withholding
 Counterparts
 REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
  -8-




---



##### 



COMPANY
    
    BUSINESS OBJECTS S.A.By:John G. SchwarzTitle:
    
    Chief Executive OfficerEMPLOYEE
    
    By:Title:
  -9-
UTILITIES COMM. v. ATTORNEY GENERAL.

No. 196A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 16, 2006.

Gary R. Govert, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Margaret A. Force, Assistant Attorney General, for Attorney General.

James H. Jeffries, IV, Charlotte, Kim R. Cocklin, Senior Vice President, for Piedmont Natural Gas Co., et al.

Gina C. Holt, for Public Staff-Utilities Comm.

James P. West, Raleigh, for Carolina Utilities Customers.

Mary Lynne Grigg, Craig Collins, for Public Service Co. of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th day of September 2006 by the Attorney General for Dismissal of Appeal Pursuant to Settlement:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 16th day of November 2006."
<PAGE>
 
                                 Exhibit 10.9
 
     Mr. Murphy's Employment Agreement is the same as the Employment Agreement
in Exhibit 10.2, which is incorporated herein by reference except as to: (i) the
name of the signatory, which is Daniel L. Murphy; (ii) the position in Section
1, which is Executive Vice President and Retail Banking Officer; (iii) the
signatory for the Company, which is Joseph L. Mancino; (iv) the guarantor for
the Company, which is Joseph L. Mancino; and (v) the amount of the base salary
in Section 3(a), which is $180,000.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3054 

To require all automobiles manufactured or sold in the United States to 

be equipped with a real time and average fuel economy display. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 22, 2008 

Mr. SMITH (for himself and Mr. KERRY) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

A BILL 

To require all automobiles manufactured or sold in the 

United States to be equipped with a real time and average fuel economy display. 

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

3 SECTION 1. REAL TIME FUEL ECONOMY DISPLAY. 

4 Section 32908 of title 49, United States Code, is 

5 amended by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(h) REAL TIME FUEL ECONOMY DISPLAY.—Begin7 ning with model year 2013, any automobile manufactured 

8 or sold in the United States shall be equipped with a real 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•S 3054 IS

1 time and average fuel economy display in a location that 

2 is easily visible to the driver of such automobile.’’. 

Æ 


erowe on PRODPC61 with BILLS
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-18-00222-CR

DEMETRIUS RASHAD GREER,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 19th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017-874-C1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Demetrius Greer attempts to appeal his conviction for assault family violence. The 

certificate of right to appeal indicates that this is a plea bargain case and that Greer 

waived his right to appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Notwithstanding that we are dismissing this appeal, Greer may file a motion for 

rehearing with this Court within 15 days after this opinion and judgment are rendered if 

he believes this opinion and judgment are erroneously based on inaccurate information 
Greer v. State Page 2

or documents. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1. Moreover, if Greer desires to have the opinion 

and judgment of this Court reviewed by filing a petition for discretionary review, that 

petition must be filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals within 30 days after either the 

day this Court’s judgment is rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing is 

overruled by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2 (a).

For the reasons stated, this appeal is dismissed. 

AL SCOGGINS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed July 18, 2018

Do not publish 

[CR25]
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 111/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 111/2013 of 6 February 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 111/2013                     

# of 6 February 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 6 February 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

José Manuel Silva Rodríguez                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
STATE v. Richard Michael HARLEY.

No. 167P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 19, 2006.

Patricia A. Duffy, Assistant Attorney General, Belinda J. Foster, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th day of April 2006 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 19th day of April 2006."
SWIFT v. RICHARDSON SPORTS, et al.

No. 598P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

R. James Lore, Raleigh, for Michael Swift.

Hatcher B. Kincheloe, Charlotte, for Richardson Sports, et al.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th day of April 2006 by Defendants to Dismiss Plaintiff's Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference this the 29th day of June 2006."

Justice TIMMONS-GOODSON recused.
STATE v. FUNDERBURK.

No. COA06-549.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed February 20, 2007.

Certification Date March 12, 2007.

Appeal from Mecklenburg (03CRS212875, 03CRS212876, 03CRS505574).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 213/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 213/2013 of 11 March 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 213/2013                     

# of 11 March 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 11 March 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President*,                           

José Manuel Silva Rodríguez                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
IN RE S.L.

No. COA06-113.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed December 19, 2006.

Certification Date January 8, 2007.

Appeal from Randolph (04J116).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
Exhibit
32.2





TELETOUCH
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.





OFFICER’S
CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT
TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. 1350)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TELETOUCH COMMUNICATIONS,
INC. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended August 31, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned, Douglas E. Sloan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of his
knowledge:





1.
            The
      Report is in full compliances 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 operation of the Company.





/s/ Douglas E.
      SloanDouglas
      E. SloanChief
      Financial OfficerOctober
      14, 2010
DURHAM LAND OWNERS ASSOCIATION, an unincorporated association, Anderson Homes, Inc., Cimarron Capital, Inc., d/b/a Cimarron Homes, the Dress Company d/b/a The Dress Homes Company, M/I Homes of Raleigh, LLC, Olde South Homes, Inc., Randall H. Stewart, St. Lawrence Homes, Inc., Sun River Builders, Inc., Thomas Hugh Mullen, 3-D Builders, Inc., Vance Crabtree Builders, LLC, Westfield Homes of the Carolinas, LLC, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. COUNTY OF DURHAM.

No. 343P05-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

Chuck Kitchen, County Attorney, for County of Durham.

Henry C. Fordham, Jr., for Durham County Land Owners, et al.

*679Grayson Kelley, Senior Deputy Attorney General, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 12th day of June 2006 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th day of June 2006."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 12th day of June 2006 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th day of June 2006."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-29-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-27-1997
<CASH>                                           3,725
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,153,744
<ALLOWANCES>                                    94,477
<INVENTORY>                                  5,456,495
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,613,256
<PP&E>                                       4,716,467
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,516,169
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,426,455
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,316,599
<BONDS>                                      4,500,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        49,670
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,560,186
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,426,455
<SALES>                                     31,531,937
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            31,531,937
<CGS>                                       10,701,088
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,701,088
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            17,863,094
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             598,240
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,369,515
<INCOME-TAX>                                   995,196
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,374,319
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                218,699
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,155,620
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21


</TABLE>
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 764/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 764/2013 of 7 August 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 764/2013                     

# of 7 August 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 7 August 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.