alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008022EN.01004501.xml

| 26.1.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/45

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 13 December 2007 — Cabrera Sánchez v OHIM — Industrias Cárnicas Valle (el charcutero artesano)

(Case T-242/06) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark el charcutero artesano - Earlier national figurative mark El Charcutero - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Absence of similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

el charcutero artesano

(2008/C 22/83)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Miguel Cabrera Sánchez (Móstoles, Spain) (represented by: J. Calderón Chavero and T. Villate Consonni, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. García Murillo, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Industrias Cárnicas Valle, SA (Madrid, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 June 2006 (Case R 790/2005-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Miguel Cabrera Sánchez and Industrias Cárnicas Valle, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Miguel Cabrera Sánchez to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Miguel Cabrera Sánchez to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

---

(1)  OJ C 261, 28.10.2006.

1

---
Eric Dale Morgan, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

July 18, 2016

**69ORDER

Petitioner filed a motion on July 12, 2016 for resentencing pursuant to Aiken v. Byars , 410 S.C. 534, 765 S.E.2d 572 (S.C. 2014). Now, therefore, pursuant to SC CONST. Art. V, § 4, **70IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Honorable Edward W. Miller be vested with exclusive jurisdiction over the Petitioner's Motion for Resentencing in the above-captioned matter.

Judge Miller shall at all times be vested with concurrent jurisdiction in all circuits of the state to dispose of matters relating to this case, and shall decide all matters pertaining to the Petitioner's Motion, and shall retain jurisdiction over this matter regardless of where he may be assigned to hold court, and may schedule such hearings as may be necessary at any time without regard as to whether there is a term of court scheduled.

If necessary, to resolve issues related to the appointment of counsel, a hearing shall be conducted within thirty (30) days of this order.

Within sixty (60) days of the date of this order, Judge Miller shall issue a scheduling order setting forth the schedule that shall be followed in this matter, including the date of the hearing on the merits. The scheduling order may be amended as necessary.

s/Costa M. Pleicones

Costa M. Pleicones

Chief Justice
STATE of North Carolina v. Abdul Arrahman ISMAEL, Defendant.

No. COA15-842.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

May 3, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Vacated and Remanded.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3859 

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to adjust minimum bids and annual 

rentals for oil and gas and tar sands leases to reflect inflation, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 13, 2014 

Mr. LOWENTHAL (for himself, Mr. DEFAZIO, and Mr. HOLT) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Mineral Leasing Act to adjust minimum bids 

and annual rentals for oil and gas and tar sands leases 

to reflect inflation, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Oil and Gas Leasing 

5 Inflation Adjustment Act’’. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3859 IH

1 SEC. 2. ADJUSTMENT OF MINIMUM BIDS AND ANNUAL 

2 RENTALS FOR OIL AND GAS AND TAR SANDS 

3 LEASES TO REFLECT INFLATION. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 17 of the Mineral Leasing 

5 Act (30 U.S.C. 226) is amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (b)(1)(B), by striking ‘‘$2 per 

7 acre’’ and inserting ‘‘$4 per acre’’; 

8 (2) in subsection (b)(2)(C), by striking ‘‘$2 per 

9 acre’’ and inserting ‘‘$5 per acre’’; 

10 (3) in subsection (d)— 

11 (A) by striking ‘‘$1.50 per acre’’ and in12 serting ‘‘$3 per acre’’; and 

13 (B) by striking ‘‘$2 per acre’’ and insert14 ing ‘‘$4 per acre’’; and 

15 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

16 ‘‘(q) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.— 

17 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall— 

18 ‘‘(A) by regulation, at least once every 4 

19 years, adjust each of the dollar amounts that 

20 applies under subsections (b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(C), 

21 and (d) by the cost-of-living adjustment; and 

22 ‘‘(B) publish each such regulation in the 

23 Federal Register. 

24 ‘‘(2) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection: 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3859 IH

1 ‘‘(A) COST-OF-LIVING ADJUSTMENT.—The 

2 term ‘cost-of-living adjustment’ means the per3 centage (if any) for a dollar amount by which— 

4 ‘‘(i) the Consumer Price Index for the 

5 month of June of the calendar year pre6 ceding the adjustment, exceeds 

7 ‘‘(ii) the Consumer Price Index for 

8 the month of June of the calendar year in 

9 which the dollar amount was last set or ad10 justed pursuant to law. 

11 ‘‘(B) CONSUMER PRICE INDEX.—The term 

12 ‘Consumer Price Index’ means the Consumer 

13 Price Index for all-urban consumers published 

14 by the Department of Labor.’’. 

15 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 

16 17(b)(1)(B) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 

17 226(b)(1)(B)) is amended beginning in the first sentence 

18 by striking ‘‘for a period’’ and all that follows through 

19 ‘‘Thereafter, the’’ and inserting ‘‘. The’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Biomedical Library and Informatics Review Committee.                    

*Date:*                         November 9-10, 2005.                    

*Time:*                         November 9, 2005, 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Library of Medicine, Building 38, Second Floor, Board Room, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892.                    

*Time:*                         November 10, 2005, 8 a.m. to 12 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Library of Medicine, Building 38, Second Floor, Board Room, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Arthur A. Petrosian, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Extramural Programs, National Library of Medicine, 6705 Rockledge Drive, Suite 301, Bethesda, MD 20892-7968, 301-496-4253,                         *petrosia@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.879, Medical Library Assistance, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 12, 2005.

Anthony M. Coelho, Jr.,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 05-18599  Filed 9-16-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
1529.

#### Baker *v.*Hughes.

Action for money bad and received, from city court of Dublin— Judge Burch. October 12, 1908.

Submitted January 26,

Decided February 9, 1909.

*Ira S. Chappell,*for plaintiff in error. *W. G. Davis,*contra.

Powell, J.

1. Where a debtor entrusts a sum of money to his agent, to be paid to his creditor, and the agent fails to pay over the money, an action for money had and received will lie in favor of the creditor against the agent.

2. Where a discharge in bankruptcy is pleaded as a defense to an action, the burden is on the defendant to make it affirmatively appear that the plaintiff’s demand was a provable debt at the date of the adjudication, in bankruptcy. *Judgment affirmed.*

*Hill, C. J., disqualified.*
PARAMOUNT RX, INC. v. Robert E. DUGGAN and Agelity, Inc.

No. 376A15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 1, 2016.

Christopher Jones, Raleigh, for Paramount Rx, Inc.

Leslie C. Packer, Raleigh, for Duggan, Robert E., et al.

James Michael Weiss, for Duggan, Robert E., et al.

Amanda G. Ray, Raleigh, for Paramount Rx, Inc.

The following order has been entered on the joint motion filed on the 31st of March 2016 by Plaintiff to Dismiss Appeal:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of April 2016."
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 9, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136002 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136002 

 COA: 281312 

Wayne CC: 95-003691

MAURICE WILLIAMS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 4, 2008 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

s0828 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 9, 2008 

 Clerk
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-08-00251-CR

Brenda Sue Gaines, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LAMPASAS COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 8110, HONORABLE LLOYD DOUGLAS SHAVER, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The reporter’s record has not been filed and is overdue. The two reporters who are

responsible for preparing the record have informed the Court that no request for the record has

been made. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(b). The record contains an affidavit of indigence signed by

appellant and an order appointing counsel for the appeal.

To avoid further delays and protect the rights of the parties, the appeal is abated and

the trial court is instructed to determine, following a hearing if necessary, whether appellant is

presently indigent. If the court finds that appellant is indigent, it shall direct the court reporters to

prepare the reporter’s record at no cost to appellant. Copies of all findings, conclusions, orders, and

a transcription of the reporter’s notes, if a hearing is held, shall be tendered for filing in this Court

no later than October 3, 2008.
2

___________________________________________

Jan P. Patterson, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Waldrop and Henson

Abated

Filed: August 28, 2008

Do Not Publish
# C_2008171EN.01004803.xml

| 5.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/48

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 May 2008 — Fränkischer Weinbauverband v OHIM (three-dimensional mark ‘Bocksbeutel’)

(Case T-180/06) (1)

1

(2008/C 171/93)

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

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

---

(1)  OJ C 212, 2.9.2006.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3865 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3865

 To prohibit the Internal Revenue Service from modifying the standard 
for determining whether an organization is operated exclusively for the 
 promotion of social welfare for purposes of section 501(c)(4) of the 
                     Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 14, 2014

   Mr. Camp introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the Internal Revenue Service from modifying the standard 
for determining whether an organization is operated exclusively for the 
 promotion of social welfare for purposes of section 501(c)(4) of the 
                     Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Stop Targeting of Political Beliefs 
by the IRS Act of 2014''.

SEC. 2. APPLICABLE STANDARD FOR DETERMINATIONS OF WHETHER AN 
              ORGANIZATION IS OPERATED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PROMOTION OF 
              SOCIAL WELFARE.

    (a) In General.--The standard and definitions as in effect on 
January 1, 2010, which are used to determine whether an organization is 
operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare for purposes 
of section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall apply 
for purposes of determining the status of organizations under section 
501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (b) Prohibition on Modification of Standard.--The Secretary of the 
Treasury may not issue, revise, or finalize any regulation (including 
the proposed regulations published at 78 Fed. Reg. 71535 (November 29, 
2013)), revenue ruling, or other guidance not limited to a particular 
taxpayer relating to the standard and definitions specified in 
subsection (a).
    (c) Application to Organizations.--Except as provided in subsection 
(d), this section shall apply with respect to any organization claiming 
tax exempt status under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 which was created on, before, or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (d) Sunset.--This section shall not apply after the one-year period 
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2010024EN.01000302.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 October 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria)) — PAGO International GmbH v Tirolmilch registrierte Genossenschaft mbH

(Case C-301/07) (1)

1

(Trade marks - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 9(1)(c) - Trade mark with a reputation in the Community - Geographical extent of the reputation)

2010/C 24/04

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: PAGO International GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Tirolmilch registrierte Genossenschaft mbH

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Oberster Gerichtshof — Interpretation of Article 9(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1) — Rights of the proprietor of a trade mark having a reputation in the Community — Trade mark having a reputation only in one Member State — Protection of the trade mark in the whole of the Community or only in one Member State

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 9(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to benefit from the protection afforded in that provision, a Community trade mark must be known by a significant part of the public concerned by the products or services covered by that trade mark, in a substantial part of the territory of the European Community, and that, in view of the facts of the main proceedings, the territory of the Member State in question may be considered to constitute a substantial part of the territory of the Community.

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 22.9.2007.

1

---
Exhibit 10.8(h) 

**EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT**

          THIS EIGHTH AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”) is made as of this 16th day of April, 2007 to that certain EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, dated as of November 30, 1999, asheretofore amended (collectively, the “Employment Agreement”), by and between ROBERT HENSLEY (“Employee”) and JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC. (“Employer”).

                FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt and adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, Employer and Employee, being the sole parties to the Employment Agreement, hereby amend the EmploymentAgreement as follows: 

          1. Subject to earlier termination otherwise set forth in the Employment Agreement, the last day of the Employment Period shall be January 31, 2009. 

          2. Effective March 4, 2007, Employee’s Base Salary shall be $470,000.00.

          Except as specifically amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect according to its terms. To the extent of any conflict between the terms of this Amendment and theterms of the remainder of the Employment Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shall control and prevail. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have those respective meanings attributed to them in the Employment Agreement. ThisAmendment shall hereafter be deemed a part of the Employment Agreement for all purposes. The terms of employment set forth in this Amendment have been approved by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of the Employer. 

          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written. 

JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 63 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to remove the restriction 

that a clinical psychologist or clinical social worker provide services 

in a comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation facility to a patient only 

under the care of a physician. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mr. REID (for Mr. INOUYE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to remove 

the restriction that a clinical psychologist or clinical social worker provide services in a comprehensive outpatient rehabilitation facility to a patient only under 

the care of a physician. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Autonomy for Psy5 chologists and Social Workers Act of 2007’’. 


ccoleman on PRODPC75 with BILLS
2 

•S 63 IS

1 SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF RESTRICTION THAT A CLINICAL PSY2 CHOLOGIST OR CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER 

3 PROVIDE SERVICES IN A COMPREHENSIVE 

4 OUTPATIENT REHABILITATION FACILITY TO 

5 A PATIENT ONLY UNDER THE CARE OF A 

6 PHYSICIAN. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1861(cc)(2)(E) of the So8 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(cc)(2)(E)) is amended 

9 by striking ‘‘physician’’ and inserting ‘‘physician, except 

10 that a patient receiving qualified psychologist services (as 

11 defined in subsection (ii)) may be under the care of a clin12 ical psychologist with respect to such services to the extent 

13 permitted under State law and except that a patient re14 ceiving clinical social worker services (as defined in sub15 section (hh)(2)) may be under the care of a clinical social 

16 worker with respect to such services to the extent per17 mitted under State law’’. 

18 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

19 subsection (a) shall apply to services provided on or after 

20 January 1, 2008. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PRODPC75 with BILLS
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 4163

_____________________________
D ENIS R OCHESTER , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Marianne L. Aho , Judge

. June 24, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. R OBERTS , R OWE , and K ELSEY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Denis Rochester, pro se
, Appellant.

Ashley M oody, Attorney General, and Sharon S. Traxler, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
STATE of North Carolina v. David WELLS, Jr.

No. COA16-206.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

July 5, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

No Error.
In the Matter of K.S.D.

No. COA15-814.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Jan. 5, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
State of North Carolina v. Lowell Thomas Manring

No. COA16-130

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: October 4, 2016

NO ERROR.
STATE of North Carolina v. Timothy Maurice PETWAY.

No. COA15-1386.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

July 5, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  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. Section 78m(a) or Section 780(d)); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  Date:
    
    April 6, 2006
    
    
    
    /s/ Andrew F. PuzderAndrew F. PuzderChief Executive Officer