alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Veterans Affairs

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the devastating impact of Hurricane Katrina has forced the cancellation of the Advisory Committee on CARES Business Plan Studies meeting previously scheduled for Thursday, September 29, 2005, from 1 p.m. until 5 p.m., at the VA Gulf Coast Veterans Health Care System, Building 17, Recreation Hall, 400 Veterans Avenue, Biloxi, MS.

The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on proposed business plans at those VA facility sites identified in May 2004 as requiring further study by the Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Series (CARES) Decision document.

                    For additional information regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Jay Halpern, Designated Federal Officer, (00CARES), 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20024 by phone at (202) 273-5994, or by e-mail at                     *jay.halpern@va.gov*.                

Dated: September 9, 2005.

E. Philip Riggin,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 05-18290  Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 14

- 00790

- CV

I N THE INTEREST OF I.R. , et al., Children

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013

- PA

- 01212 Honorable Thomas F. Lee, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE ALVAREZ , AND JUSTICE PULLIAM

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the motion to withdraw filed by Appellant’s attorney is GRANTED, and the trial court’s order is AFFIRMED. It is ORDERED

no costs shall be assessed against Appellant in relation to this appeal because she qualifies as indigent under T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.

SIGNED February 25, 2015.

_____________________________ Jason Pulliam, Justice
EXHIBIT 32.1**Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, eachof the undersigned officers of AMB Property Corporation, the sole general partner of AMBProperty, L.P. (the “Operating Partnership”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge,that     (i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Operating Partnership for the yearend period ended December 31, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended; and     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Operating Partnership.Date: February 29, 2008                                            /s/ HAMID R. MOGHADAM   Hamid R. Moghadam   Chairman of the Board andChief Executive Officer of AMB Property Corporation,the general partner of AMB Property, L.P.                                               /s/ THOMAS S. OLINGER   Thomas S. Olinger   Chief Financial Officer of AMB Property Corporation,the general partner of AMB Property, L.P.        The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the OperatingPartnership, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporationlanguage in such filing.
<PAGE>



EXHIBIT 32

                    CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 Universal Automotive
Industries, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), Arvin Scott, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, Robert W.
Zimmer, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, and Peter Riofski, as Chief
Accounting Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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) 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.


/s/ Arvin Scott
---------------------------------------
Name:  Arvin Scott
Title:  Chief Executive Officer
Date:  August 13, 2003


/s/ Robert W. Zimmer
---------------------------------------
Name: Robert W. Zimmer
Title:  Chief Financial Officer
Date:  August 13, 2003


/s/ Peter Riofski
---------------------------------------
Name:  Peter Riofski
Title:  Vice President & Controller
Date:  August 13, 2003


This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to ss. 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 ss.18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

See also the certification pursuant to Sec. 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, which is also attached to this Report.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6371

ALBERT CURTIS MILLS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge.

(8:07-cv-03466-DKC)

Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 19, 2008

Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Albert Curtis Mills, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Albert Curtis Mills seeks to appeal the district court’s

order placing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint on the

unassigned docket in accordance with Mills’ pre-filing injunction.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that the

district court did not err. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons

stated by the district court. See Mills v. Warden, No.

8:07-cv-03466-DKC (D. Md. Jan. 8, 2008). 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
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00334-CV

Pamela MONTEZ,

Appellant

v.

Ahmed SAID,

Appellee

From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2007-CI-11657

Honorable Michael Peden, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 27, 2008

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Appellee has filed a “Motion to Dismiss Frivolous Appeal” and “Request for Just Damages,”

arguing that we do not have jurisdiction over this appeal and that sanctions should be assessed

against “Appellant and/or Olga Brown” for filing this frivolous appeal. We grant the motion in part.

Appellant’s notice of appeal states that she is appealing the trial court’s order of April 30,

2008, and that this is an accelerated appeal. In his motion to dismiss, appellee argues that the trial

court’s order is interlocutory and cannot be appealed at this time.
04-08-00334-CV

Although requested by appellee, we decline to assess sanctions against Appellant and/or her lawyer.

1

-2-

The trial court’s order of April 30, 2008, imposed sanctions against appellant and her lawyer

for abusing the discovery process. Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 215.1(d) and 215.2(b)(8) each

provide that a sanction order “shall be subject to review on appeal from the final judgment.” TEX.

R.CIV. P. 215.1(d), 215.2(b)(8). According to the clerk’s record, no final judgment has been signed

at this time. We therefore ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be

dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Morales v. Bombardier, Inc., No. 11-04-00251-CV, 2004 WL

2610008 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2004, no pet.). Appellant failed to respond.

We, therefore, dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.1

PER CURIAM
# C_2009267EN.01008402.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 267/84 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 267/84

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 15 September 2009 — Hartwig v Commission

(Case F-141/06) (1)

1

(Appointment - Members of the temporary staff appointed as officials - Candidates names included on a reserve list of a competition published prior to the entry into force of the new Staff Regulations - Grading pursuant to the new less favourable rules - Transitional measures of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations)

2009/C 267/152

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Marc Hartwig (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: T. Bontinck, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall and H. Krämer, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the decisions of the Commission and the Parliament with effect from 16 April 2006 by which the applicant, a member of temporary staff in grade B*7 and successful candidate in Open Competition PE/34/B, was appointed an official in grade B*3, step 2, pursuant to the provisions of Annex XIII to the Staff Regulations.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to rule on the action in Case F-141/06 Hartwig v Commission. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to rule on the action in Case F-141/06 Hartwig v Commission.

| 2. | Each party is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Each party is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 20, 27.1.2007, p. 40.

1

---
----

(2004/C 33 E/025)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3846/02

by Ieke van den Burg (PSE) and Wilfried Kuckelkorn (PSE) to the Commission

(9 January 2003)

Subject:   European law aspects of German benefits to promote home ownership (‘Eigenheimzulagen’)

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(27 March 2003)

----

(1)OJ L 257, 19.10.1968, p. 2.

(2)OJ L 149, 5.7.1971, p. 2.

(3)  Case C-85/96, Martinez Sala ECR, [1998] I-02691.

(4)  Case C-279/93 Schumacker [1995] ECR-I-225.

----
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**
I, Randy S. Leiser , certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the quarterly report onForm 10-Q/A of Kitty Hawk, Inc.; and
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
Date: November 16, 2004   By: /s/ RANDY S. LEISERRandy S. LeiserVice President and Chief Financial Officer
STATE of North Carolina v. Danny Roger KEARNEY.

No. 477P08.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 5, 2009.

Bruce T. Cunningham, Southern Pines, for Kearney.

*872Charles Reece, Assistant Attorney General, Howard S. Boney, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 20th day of October 2008 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Wilson County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of February 2009."
State v. William Gerald Price

104P16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 9, 2016

William Gerald Price, for Price, William Gerald.

*29Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Tom Horner, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of March 2016 by Defendant for Notice of Appeal:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of June 2016."
STATE of North Carolina v. Aaron PITTMAN.

No. 175P12-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr., Southern Pines, for Pittman, Aaron.

Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Kathleen N. Bolton, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Michael D. Waters, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 23rd of September 2015 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

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

ERVIN, J. recused.
# C_2008209EN.01004502.xml

| 15.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/45

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 9 July 2008 — Coffee Store v OHIM (THE COFFEE STORE)

(Case T-323/05) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark THE COFFEE STORE - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2008/C 209/78)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: The Coffee Store GmbH (Mannheim, Germany) (represented by: M. Buddeberg, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 June 2005 (Case R 855/2004-2) concerning an application for the registration of the word sign THE COFFEE STORE as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders The Coffee Store GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders The Coffee Store GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 281, 12.11.2005.

1

---
# C_2008301EN.01006801.xml

| 22.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/68 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/68

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 23 September 2008 — Augenault and Others v Council

(Case F-16/06) (1)

1

(2008/C 301/135)

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 96, 22.4.2006, p. 38.

1

---
# C_2023252EN.01007802.xml

| 17.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/78 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/78

---

Action brought on 31 May 2023 — WeinArt Handelsgesellschaft v EUIPO — Donnafugata (KABI)

(Case T-302/23)

(2023/C 252/94)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: WeinArt Handelsgesellschaft mbH (Geisenheim, Germany) (represented by: M. Heinrich, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Donnafugata Srl (Marsala, Italy)

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 word mark KABI — Application for registration No 18 178 376

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 March 2023 in Case R 2064/2022-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and order the registration of the trade mark at issue for the contested goods; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and order the registration of the trade mark at issue for the contested goods;

| — | order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear the applicant’s costs for the proceedings, including the opposition, the appeal proceedings and the proceedings concerning the application before the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal to bear the applicant’s costs for the proceedings, including the opposition, the appeal proceedings and the proceedings concerning the application before the General Court.

Plea in law

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

—

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

---
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 26, 2011

p0919 

# Order

September 26, 2011

143309

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143309 COA: 303757 Jackson CC: 10-005121-FH FRANKLIN DELANO THAYER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the May 27, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
# C_2023261EN.01004401.xml

| 24.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/44

---

Action brought on 9 June 2023 — Pfriem v EUIPO — U-Control (UC)

(Case T-316/23)

(2023/C 261/60)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Hanns Pfriem (Schweinfurt, Germany) (represented by: M. Pütz-Poulalion, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: U-Control Srl (Torrile, Italy)

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: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark UC — International registration designating the European Union No 1 569 179

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2023 in Case R 1404/2022-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | uphold the opposition No B3146448 in its entirety, and reject the contested application in respect of all contested goods and services;
  in the alternative,
  remit the case to the Board of Appeal for re-examination. |
| --- | --- |

—

uphold the opposition No B3146448 in its entirety, and reject the contested application in respect of all contested goods and services;

in the alternative,

remit the case to the Board of Appeal for re-examination.

| — | order EUIPO to bear the applicant’s costs and expenses. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to bear the applicant’s costs and expenses.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;

| — | Infringement of Article 27(2) in connection with Article 8(3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 27(2) in connection with Article 8(3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) in connection with Article 33(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) in connection with Article 33(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
LOCKLAR v. BROKERS, INC.

No. COA08-154.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed September 16, 2008.

Certification Date October 6, 2008.

Appeal from Davidson (03CVS1504).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
2008 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

8-22-2008

Budget Blinds Inc v. White

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential

Docket No. 06-2610

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2008 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Budget Blinds Inc v. White" (2008). 2008 Decisions. Paper 576.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008/576
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Case No: 06-2610

BUDGET BLINDS, INC.,

 Appellant

 v.

VALERIE WHITE;

BUDGET BLINDS OF NJ, INC;

VAL U BLINDS, INC.

Case No: 06-2733

BUDGET BLINDS, INC.

 v.

VALERIE WHITE;

BUDGET BLINDS OF NJ, INC.;

VAL U BLINDS, INC.,

 Appellants

 

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

 

The precedential opinion filed on July 28, 2008 is AMENDED as follows: (1) the

Roman numeral sections I, III, IV, V, VI are amended to I, II, III, IV, and V; and (2) the citation

on page 42 to Sebastian Int’l, Inc. v. Russolillo, No. 00-03476 CM, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

21510 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 25, 2005) is amended to read Sebastian Int’l, Inc. v. Russolillo, No. 00-

03476 CM, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21510 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 25, 2000).

By the Court:

 /s/ D. Brooks Smith 

United States Circuit Judge 

Date: August 22, 2008