alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In the Matter of P.S.

No. 327P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

Robert W. Ewing, Clemmons, Attorney at Law, for Starnes, Tonya.

James N. Freeman, Jr., Elkin, Attorney at Law, for Alleghany County DSS.

Kay Linn Hobart, Raleigh, Attorney at Law, for GAL.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Respondent (Mother) on the 22nd of September 2015 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:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of November 2015."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Respondent (Mother) on the 22nd of September 2015 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the District Court, Alleghany County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the District Court of that County:

> "Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of November 2015."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-27-1997
<CASH>                                           3,721
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   39,564
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,621
<INVENTORY>                                     62,071
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               110,012
<PP&E>                                          30,208
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,258
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 131,168
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           59,263
<BONDS>                                          3,876
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            57
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,852
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   131,168
<SALES>                                        158,170
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               158,170
<CGS>                                          122,959
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  122,959
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   180
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,955
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,818
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,350
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,468
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,468
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.43
        

</TABLE>
STATE v. MOORE.

No. COA08-800.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed February 17, 2009.

Certification Date March 9, 2009.

Appeal from Wake (07CRS75867).

Case reported without published opinion. Dismissed.
# C_2023112EN.01004002.xml

| 27.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/40

---

Action brought on 8 February 2023 — Olive Line International v EUIPO — Santa Rita Harinas (SANTARRITA)

(Case T-52/23)

(2023/C 112/52)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Olive Line International, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: K. Guridi Sedlak, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Santa Rita Harinas, SLU (Loranca de Tajuña, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark SANTARRITA — Application for registration No 18 236 520

Proceedings before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 December 2022 in Case R 5772022-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and declare that there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks since the co-defendant, the proprietor of the opposing mark, has not proved minimal and genuine use of its sign for the goods fried onions; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and declare that there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks since the co-defendant, the proprietor of the opposing mark, has not proved minimal and genuine use of its sign for the goods fried onions;

| — | in the alternative and cumulatively, annul the contested decision and declare that there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks in respect of the goods prepared olives and fried onions in Class 29, as they are different goods; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative and cumulatively, annul the contested decision and declare that there is no likelihood of confusion between the opposing marks in respect of the goods prepared olives and fried onions in Class 29, as they are different goods;

| — | order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs of the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Plea in law

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

---
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-08-170-CR

JORGE BARRON	APPELLANT

	V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS	STATE

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

	FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 1 OF DENTON COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	On February 20, 2008, the trial court sentenced appellant Jorge Barron to three hundred sixty five days’ confinement and a $2,021 fine upon his conviction by a jury for misdemeanor assault-family violence.  Appellant timely filed a motion for new trial; thus, his notice of appeal was due May 20, 2008.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(2).

	On July 10, 2008, we notified appellant of our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over this appeal because his notice of appeal was not filed in the trial court until May 22, 2008.2  We informed appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal unless he filed a response on or before July 21, 2008 advising us whether the mailbox rule applies in this case.  See Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(b).  Appellant has not filed a response.

	A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of rule 26 of the rules of appellate procedure is essential to vest this court with jurisdiction over an appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1); Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); York v. State, 69 S.W.3d 792, 793 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002, no pet.).  The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has expressly held that without a timely filed notice of appeal or motion for extension of time, we cannot exercise jurisdiction over an appeal.  See Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996).  Because appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely filed and he did not timely file a motion for 

extension of time, we dismiss this case for want of jurisdiction.  See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

								PER CURIAM

PANEL:  LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and HOLMAN, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: August 21, 2008
Exhibit 99.1

                       HEADLANDS MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC.
                Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 1997-4

                              Officer's Certificate

In connection with the above-referenced trust and pursuant to Section 3.13 of
the related Pooling and Servicing Agreement ("Agreement"), Headlands Mortgage
Company (as "Master Servicer") hereby confirms the following:

(i)   a review of the activities of the Master Servicer during 1997 and of
      performance under the Agreement has been made under the undersigned's
      supervision; and

(ii)  to the best of the undersigned's knowledge, based on such review, the
      Master Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement
      for the calendar year 1997.

                                       HEADLANDS MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC.


                                       By: /s/ Gilbert J. MacQuarrie
                                          --------------------------------------
                                           Gilbert J. MacQuarrie
                                           Vice President, Treasurer and
                                           Secretary


                                       11
STATE v. Michael Ray KING.

No. 190P13-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

Michael Ray King, Bunn, for King, Michael Ray.

Kimberly N. Callahan, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Todd Williams, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 25th of September 2015 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of November 2015."

ERVIN, J. recused.
----

(2004/C 33 E/275)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2479/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 July 2003)

Subject:   Canned tuna from Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia

Since 1 July 2003 Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia have benefited from a quota for exports of canned tuna to the EU at a reduced tariff of 12 % on the basis of Council Regulation (EC) No 975/2003 (1) of 5 June 2003 opening and providing for the administration of a tariff quota for imports of canned tuna covered by CN codes 1604 14 11, 1604 14 18 and 1604 20 70.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(29 August 2003)

Sanitary conditions for the imports of fishery products, including tuna, from Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand are laid down in Commission Decision 94/324/EC (2), 95/190/EC (3) and 94/325/EC (4) respectively (as amended).

----

(1)OJ L 141, 7.6.2003, p. 1.

(2)  94/324/EC: Commission Decision of 19 May 1994 laying down special conditions governing imports of fishery and aquaculture products originating in Indonesia, OJ L 145, 10.6.1994.

(3)  95/190/EC: Commission Decision of 17 May 1995 laying down special conditions governing the import of fishery and aquaculture products originating in the Philippines, OJ L 123, 3.6.1995.

(4)  94/325/EC: Commission Decision of 19 May 1994 laying down special conditions governing imports of fishery and aquaculture products originating in Thailand, OJ L 145, 10.6.1994.

(5)  Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products, OJ L 268, 24.9.1991.

----
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                         Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-66080) pertaining to the Williams Communications Group, Inc. 1999
Stock Plan, Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-58462) pertaining to the
WCG Investment Plan, Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-61306) pertaining
to the Williams Communications Group, Inc. 2001 Transition Plan for
Non-Executive Officer Employees, and Registration Statement (Form S-3 No.
333-53696) for the registration of common stock, preferred stock, depositary
shares, debt securities, warrants, stock purchase contracts and stock purchase
units and subscription rights, of our report dated March 28, 2002, with respect
to the consolidated financial statements and schedules of Williams
Communications Group, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2001.

                                        ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Tulsa, Oklahoma
March 28, 2002
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 11.1

                Statement Re: Computation of Per Share Earnings
                   (In thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                 1997       1996       1995
                                                 ----       ----       ----
<S>                                              <C>        <C>        <C>
BASIC AND DILUTIVE:

Weighted average common shares outstanding      2,138        572        214

Net loss                                      $(7,193)   $(2,865)    $ (744)

Accretion of mandatory redemable value
 of convertible preferred stock                 1,286        494          1
                                              -------    -------     ------
Net Loss attributable to common
  stockholders                                $(8,480)   $(3,359)    $ (745)

Net loss per common share                     $ (3.97)   $ (5.87)    $(3.48)

PRO FORMA:

Weighted average common shares
  outstanding                                   2,138        572

Dilutive common stock equivalents:

  Convertible securities, using the
    if-converted method                         5,867      3,415
                                              -------    -------

Common and common equivalent shares
  used in the calculation of net loss
  per share                                     8,005      3,987
                                              -------    -------
                                              -------    -------

Net loss                                      $(7,193)   $(2,865)
                                              -------    -------
                                              -------    -------

Net loss per common and common
  equivalent share                             $(0.90)    $(0.72)
                                              -------    -------
                                              -------    -------
</TABLE>
Christopher W. ABELLS, Plaintiff, v. Tiffany J. MARTIN (formerly Abells ), Defendant.

No. COA15-88.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Oct. 6, 2015.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed in Part; Remanded in Part.
IN RE EM.M.W.

No. COA08-941.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed January 6, 2009.

Certification Date January 26, 2009.

Appeal from Guilford (02JA467, 06JA863).

Case reported without published opinion. Dismissed.
STATE of North Carolina v. George W. BALDWIN.

No. 47P02-8.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 11, 2008.

George W. Baldwin, Pro Se.

Robert Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Robert F. Johnson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 22nd day of February 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:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th day of June 2008."
----

(2004/C 33 E/069)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0721/03

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(11 March 2003)

Subject:   Prestige: setting up a European civil protection force

On 19 December 2002 the European Parliament adopted a resolution on safety at sea and measures to alleviate the effects of the Prestige disaster. Paragraph 20 calls for the setting up of ‘a European civil protection force capable of responding to natural and industrial disasters, to create a legal framework for European responses to disasters and to appoint a Commissioner responsible’.

What measures has the Commission taken or does it intend to take in response?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2003)

The Treaty establishing the European Union does not allow for a European Civil Protection Force. Consequently a Commission co-ordination mechanism to facilitate reinforced co-operation in civil protection assistance interventions (1) entered into force on 1st January 2002. Civil protection measures at Union level have strictly to respect the principle of subsidiarity.

The Union Response Centre, established in the above-mentioned framework, co-ordinates the assistance offered by the Member States in case of accidents.

Moreover, the Commission is also running a specific action programme in the field of response to marine pollution (2).

Finally, the Commission already announced its intention to ammend the Regulation creating the European Maritime Safety Agency in order to allow EMSA to purchase or lease anti-pollution ships in cases of maritime pollution in the Union.

----

(1)  Council Decision 2001/792/EC, Euratom of 23 October 2001 establishing a Community mechanism to facilitate reinforced cooperation in civil protection assistance interventions, OJ L 297, 15.11.2001.

(2)  Decision No 2850/2000/EC of 20 December 2000 of the Parliament and of the Council setting up a Community framework for cooperation in the field of accidental or deliberate marine pollution, OJ L 332, 28.12.2000.

----
# C_2023063EN.01005602.xml

| 20.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/56

---

Action brought on 15 November 2022 — Register.com v Commission

(Case T-725/22)

(2023/C 63/74)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Register.com LP — Sucursal em Portugal (Zona Franca da Madeira) (Funchal, Portugal) (represented by: G. Leite de Campos and M. Clemente, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | annul Articles 1 to 3, Article 4(1) to (3) and the second part of (4), and Articles 5 and 6 of Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1414 of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal for Zona Franca da Madeira (ZFM) — Regime III, (1) and, in the alternative |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Articles 1 to 3, Article 4(1) to (3) and the second part of (4), and Articles 5 and 6 of Commission Decision (EU) 2022/1414 of 4 December 2020 on aid scheme SA.21259 (2018/C) (ex 2018/NN) implemented by Portugal for Zona Franca da Madeira (ZFM) — Regime III, (1) and, in the alternative

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 108(2) TFEU and Articles 21 to 23 of Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015.

Second plea in law, alleging an irreconcilable contradiction between the contested decision and the reasons on which it is based.

Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of conferral of powers, enshrined in Article 5 TFEU.

Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 107 TFEU, in that some of the cases included in the decision do not involve State aid and the Portuguese State has been unjustly enriched, in breach of the principle that the wrongdoer (the Portuguese State) should not benefit from the infringement.

Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 26 TFEU as regards the promotion of the internal market.

---

(1)  OJ 2022 L 217, p. 49.

---
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 7, 2022

NO. 03

- 22

- 00443

- CV

E. F.

- B. , Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 146TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY
BEFO RE CHIEF J USTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND SMITH

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE

This is an appeal from the final decree signed by the tr i a l court on June 23, 2022

. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no reversible error

in the trial court’s final decree

. Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s final dec ree

.

Because appellant is indigent and u nable to pay costs, no adjudica t i on of costs is made.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         214,283
<SECURITIES>                                 1,095,500
<RECEIVABLES>                                  837,758
<ALLOWANCES>                                    70,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,306,590
<PP&E>                                      12,664,143
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,686,947
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,310,689
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,443,954
<BONDS>                                     12,702,568
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           105
<OTHER-SE>                                    (72,675)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,310,689
<SALES>                                      2,410,542
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,410,542
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,863,839
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               122,597
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             319,263
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                104,843
<INCOME-TAX>                                    41,937
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             62,906
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    62,906
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>