alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                             717
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,950
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (977)
<INVENTORY>                                     17,511
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                37,157
<PP&E>                                          20,556
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (7,030)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  55,158
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,420
<BONDS>                                          8,695
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            59
<OTHER-SE>                                      32,275
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    55,158
<SALES>                                        125,796
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               131,843
<CGS>                                           86,747
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   94,159<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 739
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    170
<INCOME-TAX>                                        64
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                106
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       106
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
<FN>
<F1>F1 Provision for doubtful accounts and inventory provision included in total
costs.
</FN>


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 20, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 55131]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18696]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or 
Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than October 4, 2005.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta (Andre Anderson, Vice President) 
1000 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30303:
    1. John Joseph Mullins, Jacob Mullins, and Angelia M. Mullins, 
Cullman, Alabama; to acquire voting shares of FCB Bancshares, Inc., 
Cullman, Alabama, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of 
Premier Bank of the South, Good Hope, Alabama.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 15, 
2005.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 05-18696 Filed 9-19-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
BYRD, et al. v. FRANKLIN COUNTY.

No. 462A14-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Nov. 5, 2015.

Aubrey S. Tomlinson, Jr., Louisburg, for Franklin County (NC).

George B. Currin, Asheville, for Byrd, Aaron, et al.

Camden R. Webb, Raleigh, for Second Amendment Foundation, Inc.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 20th of August 2015 by Petitioner to Amend Record on Appeal:

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

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 13, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54082]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18065]

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

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES

Meeting of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Rules of 
Evidence

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States; Advisory Committee on 
Rules of Evidence.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on Rules of Evidence will hold a one-
day meeting. The meeting will be open to public observation but not 
participation.

DATES: November 14, 2005.

TIME: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, Judicial 
Conference Center, One Columbus Circle, NE., Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John K. Rabiej, Chief, Rules Committee 
Support Office, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, 
Washington, DC 20544, telephone (202) 502-1820.

    Dated: September 2, 2005.
John K. Rabiej,
Chief, Rules Committee Support Office.
[FR Doc. 05-18065 Filed 9-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-M
```
# C_2008092EN.01002404.xml

| 12.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/24

---

Order of the President of the Court of 6 December 2007 — Ter Lembeek International NV v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-28/07 P) (1)

1

(2008/C 92/49)

Language of the case: Dutch

Language of the case: Dutch

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

---

(1)  OJ C 82, 14.4.2007.

1

---
# C_2008107EN.01002402.xml

| 26.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 107/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/24

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 March 2008 — Compagnie générale de diététique v OHIM (GARUM)

(Case T-341/06) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for Community trade mark GARUM - Absolute ground for refusal - Relevant public - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2008/C 107/40)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Compagnie générale de diététique SAS (Caen, France) (represented by: J.-J Evrard and T. de Haan, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 September 2006 (Case R 1401/2005-1) concerning application for registration of the word sign GARUM as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 7 September 2006 (Case R 1401/2005-1). |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 7 September 2006 (Case R 1401/2005-1).

| 2. | Orders OHIM to pay its own costs and the costs of Compagnie générale de diététique SAS. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders OHIM to pay its own costs and the costs of Compagnie générale de diététique SAS.

---

(1)  OJ C 326, 30.12.2006.

1

---
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d byN i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T A N D RES BA RRERA - FLO RES, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R J r ., A tto rn e y G e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 72999 A ge nc yN o. A 092- 171- 581 OR DE R OF DI S MI S S AL *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d J a nua ry11, 2010

S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on B efo re: K L E IN F E L D , T A S H IM A , an d T A L L M A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A nd re s B arre ra -F l ores (“ B arre ra -F l ores ”) , a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f M exi co w ho ha s l a w f

ul l yr e s i de d i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s s i nc e D e c e m be r1990, pe t i t i ons f or r e v ie w o f

aB o a r d o f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ( “B I A ” ) d e c is io n d e n y in g h is ap p lic a tio n f

o rc a n c e lla tio n o f

r e m o v a l. W e d is m is s th e p e titio n . 

# FI LED FEB 02 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

W e la c kju r is d ic tio n to r e v ie w th e B I A ’s d is c r e tio n a ryd e c is io n to d e n yh is ap p lic a tio n f

o rc a n c e lla tio n o f

r e m o v a l. See 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2(a) (2)( B )( i ); Mendez- Castro v. Mukasey , 5 5 2 F . 3 d 9 7 5 , 9 8 0

– 8 1 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 9 ) . Wh i l e we re t ai n j uri sdi ct i on t o revi ew “ col orabl e” const i tut i on al cl ai m s, “ a pet i t i on erm ay no tcr ea t e the j uri sdi ct i on thatC on gres s c ho se t o rem ov e s i m pl y by c l oaki ng an ab u s e o f d i s c r e t i o n a r g u m e n ti n c o n s t i tu t i o n a l g a rb . . . . T o d e t e rm i n e wh e th e rwe ha ve j ur i s di c t i on ove rc l a i m s l abe l e d a s due pr oc e s s vi ol a t i ons , w e m us tl ook b e y o n d th e lab e l.” To rr e s -Ag u i la rv . I NS , 24 6 F . 3d 12 67 , 12 71 (9th C i r. 20 01 ). W e have hel d thata pet i t i on erdi d n otst at e acol orabl e c on st i tut i on al c ha l l e nge w he n s he c l a i m e d “ tha tthe I Jde ni e d he rr i ghtt o due pr oc e s s by m i sapp l yi ng the fa ct s of herca se t o the appl i cabl e l aw . ” M art i nez- R osas v. G on zales , 424 F . 3d 926, 930 ( 9th C i r . 2005) . B a rr e r a - F l or e s c ont e nds tha t“ the B I A a n d th e I Jb e f

o r e it, m is ap p l[ ie d ] th e le g a llyr e q u ir e d f u tu r e o r ie n te d a n a ly s is for har dshi p, ” that“ the A gency . . . di d n otprop er l y w ei gh the evi dence, ” and that

“ [b] oth the B IA and the IJi ncorrec t l y app l i ed the hardshi p st andard. ” O u r rev i ew o f th e reco rd co n v i n ces u s th atw e l ackj u ri sd i ct i o n b ecau se B a rr e r a - F l or e s ha s m e r e l yl abe l e d a n abus e of di s c r e t i on c ha l l e nge t o the di s c r e t i ona ryha r ds hi p de t e rm i na t i on a s adue pr oc e s s vi ol a t i on. P E T I T I ON DI S MI S S E D.
|                                              | JURISDICTION      OF | CONTROL BY |
|---------------------------------------------------|----------------------|------------|
| NAME      OF SUBSIDIARY                           | ORGANIZATION         | REGISTRANT | SUBSIDIARY |
| Carl      Karcher Enterprises, Inc.               | California           | 100%       |   |
| Hardee’s      Food Systems, Inc.            | North      Carolina  | 100%       |   |
| Flagstar      Enterprises, Inc.                   | Alabama              |       | 100% |
| Spardee’s      Realty, Inc.                 | Alabama              |       | 100% |
| HED,      Inc.                                    | North      Carolina  |       | 100% |
| Burger      Chef Systems, Inc.                    | North      Carolina  |       | 100% |
| Hardee’s      LTD, Fribourg                 | Switzerland          |       | 98% |
| Hardee’s      Employee Hurricane Fund, Inc. | California           |       | 100% |
| CKE      REIT II, Inc.                            | Delaware             | 100%       |   |
| Carl’s      Jr. Region VIII, Inc.           | Delaware             |       | 100% |
| Carl’s      Jr. Media Fund                  | California           | 100%       |   |
| Carl’s      Jr. National Production Fund    | California           | 100%       |   |
| CKE      Distribution, LLC                        | California           | 100%       |   |
| Aeroways,      LLC                                | California           | 100%       |   |
| Santa      Barbara Restaurant Group, Inc.         | Delaware             | 100%       |   |
| GB      Franchise Corporation                     | California           |       | 100% |
| Channel      Islands Roasting Company             | California           | 100%       |   |
# C_2008092EN.01000402.xml

| 12.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 92/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 February 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Netto Supermarkt GmbH & Co. OHG v Finanzamt Malchin

Netto Supermarkt GmbH & Co. OHG

Finanzamt Malchin

(Case C-271/06) (1)

1

(Sixth VAT Directive - Article 15(2) - Exemption for supplies of goods for export to a destination outside the Community - Conditions for exemption not fulfilled - Proof of export falsified by the purchaser - Supplier acting with due commercial care)

(2008/C 92/06)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Netto Supermarkt GmbH & Co. OHG

Applicant:

Defendant: Finanzamt Malchin

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Bundesfinanzhof — Interpretation of Community law on VAT, in particular Article 15(2) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — Reimbursement of VAT on supplies of goods for export obtained on the basis of forged documents — Exemption on grounds of fairness

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(2) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995, must be interpreted as not precluding a Member State from granting an exemption from value added tax on the supply of goods for export to a destination outside the European Community, where the conditions for such an exemption are not met, but the taxable person was not able to recognise — even by exercising due commercial care — that they were not met, because the export proofs provided by the purchaser had been forged.

---

(1)  OJ C 224, 16.9.2007.

1

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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997             SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,553,000               1,553,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                               12,186,000              12,186,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                 12,519,000              12,519,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            40,559,000              40,559,000
<PP&E>                                       6,369,000               6,369,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              59,646,000              59,646,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,761,000              19,761,000
<BONDS>                                      9,815,000               9,815,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                    26,608,000              26,608,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,718,000               2,718,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                59,646,000              59,646,000
<SALES>                                     14,112,000              45,162,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,112,000              45,162,000
<CGS>                                        6,648,000              22,265,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,008,000              24,582,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               468,000               1,344,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             471,000               3,997,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (721,000)             (6,500,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (135,000)             (1,295,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (586,000)             (4,986,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (586,000)             (4,986,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.03)                   (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

AMENDMENT OF RULE 219(b) OF THE 

PENNSYLVANIA RULES OF 

DISCIPLINARY ENFORCEMENT

:

:

:

:

:

NO. 169

DISCIPLINARY RULES

DOCKET 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of September, 2018, upon the recommendation of the 

Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania; the proposal having been 

submitted without publication in the interests of justice pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 

103(a)(3):

IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of 

Pennsylvania that Rule 219 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement is

amended in the attached form.

This ORDER shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and 

shall be effective immediately.

Material to be added is bolded and underlined.

Material to be deleted is bolded and in brackets.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF WINSLOEW FURNITURE, INC. FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
MARCH 26, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-26-1999
<CASH>                                           1,963
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,278
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     12,926
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                50,058
<PP&E>                                          13,684
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  91,826
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,021
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            72
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,152
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,826
<SALES>                                         32,910
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,910
<CGS>                                           20,031
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,072
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 123
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,715
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,531
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,184
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,184
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .56


</TABLE>
# C_2023286EN.01003301.xml

| 14.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 286/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 286/33

---

Action brought on 16 June 2023 — Importaciones Origen Pacífico v EUIPO — Molinos Nacionales (Juana de Origen)

(Case T-331/23)

(2023/C 286/45)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Importaciones Origen Pacífico SL (Valencia, Spain) (represented by: Á. Pérez Lluna, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Molinos Nacionales C.A. (Puerto Cabello, Venezuela)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark Juana de Origen — EU trade mark No 16 517 948

Proceedings before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 March 2023 in Case R 818/2022-5

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 of the present proceedings and order the other party to pay the costs incurred in the invalidity proceedings and appeal before EUIPO. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the present proceedings and order the other party to pay the costs incurred in the invalidity proceedings and appeal before EUIPO.

Pleas in law

| — | Expiry of the trade marks on which the application for a declaration of invalidity is based. |
| --- | --- |

—

Expiry of the trade marks on which the application for a declaration of invalidity is based.

| — | No genuine use of the trade marks on which the application for a declaration of invalidity is based, in accordance with Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

No genuine use of the trade marks on which the application for a declaration of invalidity is based, in accordance with Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

| — | No evidence of bad faith on the part of the applicant, pursuant to Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

No evidence of bad faith on the part of the applicant, pursuant to Article 59(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---