alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC, Plaintiff v. Herbert A. GRAY, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff v. John Wieland Homes and Neighborhoods of the Carolinas, Inc., Third-Party Defendant and Builder Support Services of the Carolinas, Inc. f/k/a John Wieland Homes And Neighborhoods of the Carolinas, Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff v. Yarbrough-Williams & Houle, Inc., Lucas-Forman, Inc., and Carter Land Surveyors & Planners, Inc., Fourth-Party Defendants.

No. 108PA14-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 10, 2015.

Debbie W. Harden, Meredith J. McKee, Charlotte, for Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC.

John R. Buric, Preston O. Odom, III, Charlotte, for Gray, Herbert A.

Fred W. DeVore, III, Charlotte, for Builder Support Services Of The Carolinas, Inc., et al.

Erik M. Rosenwood, Charlotte, for Yarbrough-Williams & Houle, Inc.

Lawrence J. Goldman, Charlotte, for Lucas-Forman, Inc.

Gregory W. Brown, Raleigh, for Carter Land Surveyors & Planners, Inc.

Matthew D. Rhoad, Davis F. Roach, Raleigh, for Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc., et al.

Joseph W. Eason, D. Martin Warf, Raleigh, for N.C. Electric Membership Corporation, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 6th of January 2015 by Plaintiff 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:

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 10th of June 2015."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6049
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HERLEY L. LOCKE, a/k/a Pooh, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-94-65-H) Submitted: November 20, 1997 Decided: December 9, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Herley L. Locke, Appellant Pro Se. John Howarth Bennett, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his motion for reduction of sentence and m otion to modify term of imprisonment. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Locke , No. CR-94-65-H (E.D.N.C. Dec. 11, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2023179EN.01007501.xml

| 22.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/75 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/75

---

Action brought on 11 April 2023 — Puma v EUIPO — Société d’équipements de boulangerie pâtisserie (BERTRAND PUMA La griffe boulangère)

(Case T-184/23)

(2023/C 179/104)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: M. Schunke and P. Trieb, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Société d’équipements de boulangerie pâtisserie (Portes-Lès-Valence, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark BERTRAND PUMA La griffe boulangère — Application for registration No 18 046 533

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 January 2023 in Case R 2420/2020-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs, including those incurred before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs, including those incurred before the Board of Appeal.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**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 on Form 10-K/A of GameTech International,
      Inc.
      (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2007, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jay M.
      Meilstrup, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
      that:




(1)
        The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d));
      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/
        JAY M.
        MEILSTRUP


Jay
        M.
        Meilstrup
 Chief
        Executive Officer January
          25, 2008
In the Matter of E.X.J. and A.J.J., minor children.

No. 341A08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 6, 2009.

Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C.App. ___, 662 S.E.2d 24 (2008), affirming a judgment and order entered 31 July 2007 by Judge Laura A. Powell in District Court, Rutherford County. Heard in the Supreme Court 17 November 2008.

Goldsmith, Goldsmith & Dews, P.A., by James W. Goldsmith, Marion, for petitioner-appellee Rutherford County Department of Social Services.

Pamela Newell Williams, Raleigh, for appellee Guardian ad Litem.

Susan J. Hall, Fayetteville, for respondent-appellant father.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

Justice BRADY did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
# C_2023179EN.01006901.xml

| 22.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/69 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/69

---

Action brought on 29 March 2023 — Amstel Brouwerij v EUIPO — Anheuser-Busch (ULTRA)

(Case T-170/23)

(2023/C 179/95)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Amstel Brouwerij BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: T. Cohen Jehoram, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Anheuser-Busch LLC (St. Louis, Missouri, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark ULTRA — European Union trade mark No 2 895 258

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 January 2023 in Case R 2088/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

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

—

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

---
# The Planning (Hazardous Substances) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2014 (revoked)

        - Previous
        - Next

E+W

Welsh Statutory Instruments

# 2014 No. 375 (W. 43)

Town And Country Planning, Wales

# The Planning (Hazardous Substances) (Amendment) (Wales) Regulations 2014 (revoked)F1

Made

20 February 2014

Laid before the National Assembly for Wales

21 February 2014

Coming into force

14 March 2014

F1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .                        

F1Regulations revoked (4.9.2015) by The Planning (Hazardous Substances) (Wales) Regulations 2015 (S.I. 2015/1597), regs. 1(1), **30(1)** (with reg. 36)
# CE2004088EN.01040201.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/402 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/402

---

(2004/C 88 E/0408)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2357/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(17 July 2003)

Subject:   Violation of religious freedom against Muslims in Uzbekistan

Subject:

Given that:

| — | on 17 June about 50 women met in Namangan to call for the release of their husbands, who are ‘prisoners of conscience’, imprisoned because of their Muslim faith; |
| --- | --- |

—

on 17 June about 50 women met in Namangan to call for the release of their husbands, who are ‘prisoners of conscience’, imprisoned because of their Muslim faith;

| — | Misor Ubaidulaeva, one of the demonstrators, is complaining about the conditions in which her husband is detained. He is beaten daily and has now lost his hearing because of the blows he has received; |
| --- | --- |

—

Misor Ubaidulaeva, one of the demonstrators, is complaining about the conditions in which her husband is detained. He is beaten daily and has now lost his hearing because of the blows he has received;

| — | the local police do not deny that they have put pressure on her to sign a written statement promising that she will not take part in any more ‘unlawful meetings’. |
| --- | --- |

—

the local police do not deny that they have put pressure on her to sign a written statement promising that she will not take part in any more ‘unlawful meetings’.

In view of the excellent economic and commercial cooperation relations between the European Union and Uzbekistan can the Commission say:

| — | whether it is aware of the facts outlined above; |
| --- | --- |

—

whether it is aware of the facts outlined above;

| — | what steps it will take, in the context of cooperation relations, as a serious and effective means of inducing Uzbekistan to respect religious freedom? |
| --- | --- |

—

what steps it will take, in the context of cooperation relations, as a serious and effective means of inducing Uzbekistan to respect religious freedom?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(14 August 2003)

(14 August 2003)

The Commission is fully aware of the very difficult conditions facing Muslims in Uzbekistan. The Commission is aware of this meeting in Namangan and is following the situation carefully.

The EU/Uzbekistan Partnership and Cooperation Agreement provides the appropriate framework for the discussion of such issues.

The Commission will continue to raise the question of religious freedom with the Uzbek authorities at each bilateral meeting.

---
# C_2023329EN.01003401.xml

| 18.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/34

---

Action brought on 3 August 2023 — Bela Vizago Nature v EUIPO — Bidah (bidah chaumel ingredientes naturales)

(Case T-452/23)

(2023/C 329/49)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Bela Vizago Nature, SL (Molina de Segura, Spain) (represented by: J. Mora Cortés, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Nawal Bidah (Murcia, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Figurative mark bidah chaumel ingredientes naturales — EU trade mark No 18 265 413

Proceedings before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 May 2023 in Case R 1509/2022-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul or revoke the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul or revoke the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and the intervener (if she intervenes in the present action) to pay the costs, including the costs of the proceedings before the Cancellation Division and the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the intervener (if she intervenes in the present action) to pay the costs, including the costs of the proceedings before the Cancellation Division and the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Mitchell Gordon RANDOLPH.

No. 31P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 6, 2008.

Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr., Southern Pines, for Randolph.

Catherine F. Jordan, Assistant Attorney General, Clark Everett, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 23rd day of January 2008 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

*541"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th day of March 2008."

HUDSON, J, recused.
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.2
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO
AMENDED AND RESTATED
CHART INDUSTRIES, INC. VOLUNTARY DEFERRED INCOME PLAN
This Amendment No. 2 to Chart Industries, Inc. Voluntary Deferred Income Plan (“Amendment No. 2”) is hereby adopted by Chart Industries, Inc., (the “Company”).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Company has established an unfunded deferred compensation plan known as the Amended and Restated Chart Industries, Inc. Voluntary Deferred Income Plan, as amended by Amendment No. 1 (the “Plan”), primarily for the purposes of providing additional deferred compensation benefits for a select group of management or highly compensated employees; and
WHEREAS, effective July 1, 2010, the Company amended and restated the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan in order modify the eligibility requirements for new hires; and
WHEREAS, Section 16 of the Plan permits the Company to amend the Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, effective as of July 13, 2016, the Company hereby adopts this Amendment No. 2 as follows:
1.    Section 3 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated so that it shall read in its entirety as follows:
“The Administrator shall determine which management employees and highly compensated employees of the Company and its Affiliates incorporated in the United States shall 









be eligible to participate in the Plan from time to time, the eligibility waiting period and such other conditions as may be applicable from time to time.  As of (i) July 1, 2010 for purposes of Section 6(a) of the Plan and (ii) January 1, 2011 for purposes of Sections 4 and 6(b) of the Plan, unless the Administrator determines otherwise, eligible employees shall include each employee whose base salary, commission and bonus actually paid or earned, or projected to be paid or earned (on an annualized basis), with respect to the Plan Year prior to the Plan Year to which a deferral election applies exceeds the compensation limit for such prior Plan Year under Section 401(a)(17) of the Code.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, any Participant who was actively participating in the Plan on June 30, 2010, shall continue to be eligible to participate in the Plan.” 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company, by its appropriate officer duly authorized, has caused this Amendment No. 2 to be executed as of this 13th day of July, 2016.


	
			
	 
	CHART INDUSTRIES, INC

	 
	 
	 

	 
	By
	/s/  Matthew J. Klaben

	 
	 
	 

	 
	Its
	Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 






2
Exhibit 32.1

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 Active Power, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James A. Clishem, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 3, 2009



|                                                      
|------------------------------------------------------
|/S/    JAMES A.
CLISHEM                               
|James A. Clishem President and Chief Executive Officer
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Jaime Tellez, * From the 142nd District

 Court of Midland County,

 Trial Court No. CR39128.

Vs. No. 11-12-00048-CR * May 16, 2013

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Wright, C.J.

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 McCall, J., and Willson, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is 

no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s 

opinion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
BALANCE SHEET OF GAMETECH INTERNATIONAL INC. (THE "COMPANY") AS OF OCTOBER
31, 1997 AND THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF THE COMPANY FOR THE YEAR ENDED
OCTOBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,019,524
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,315,108
<ALLOWANCES>                                   164,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,523,701
<PP&E>                                      11,160,067
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,135,180
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,250,657
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,945,930
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        2,834,998
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,622
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,971,036
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,250,657
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,577,821
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,248,657
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               546,860
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               215,600
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             478,387
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,741,058
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,880,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,861,058
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39
        

</TABLE>
STATE v. BARE.

No. COA07-1565.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed August 5, 2008.

Certification Date August 25, 2008.

Appeal from Wilkes (07CRS50019, 07CRS50020, 07CRS50024, 07CRS50107, 07CRS50112).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# C_2023216EN.01005501.xml

| 19.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 216/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 216/55

---

Action brought on 2 May 2023 — Bonami.CZ v EUIPO — Roval Print (bonami)

(Case T-229/23)

(2023/C 216/72)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Bonami.CZ, a.s. (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: M.-G. Marinescu, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: SC Roval Print SRL (Galati, Romania)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative trade mark bonami in yellow, red, pink, purple, blue, dark green and light green — Application for registration No 18 024 693

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 February 2023 in Case R 1292/2022-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and reject the opposition entirely; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and reject the opposition entirely;

| — | order EUIPO to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to bear the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of procedural requirements related to the (online) substantiation of the opposition; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of procedural requirements related to the (online) substantiation of the opposition;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
IN RE A.N.

No. COA08-901.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed February 17, 2009.

Certification Date March 9, 2009.

Appeal from Wake (06JT92, 06JT93, 06JT94).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.