alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008313EN.01002702.xml

| 6.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/27

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 15 October 2008 — Mote v Parliament

(Case T-345/05) (1)

1

(Privileges and immunities - Member of the European Parliament - Waiver of immunity)

(2008/C 313/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ashley Neil Mote (represented by: J. Lofthouse and C. Hayes, Barristers, and M. Monan, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: H. Krück, D. Moore and M. Windisch, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Application for the annulment of the decision of the Parliament of 5 July 2005 waiving the applicant's parliamentary immunity.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Ashley Neil Mote to bear his own costs and to pay those of the European Parliament. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ashley Neil Mote to bear his own costs and to pay those of the European Parliament.

---

(1)  OJ C 296, 26.11.2005.

1

---
# C_2008171EN.01003006.xml

| 5.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/30

---

Order of the President of the Court of 11 February 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-347/07) (1)

1

(2008/C 171/53)

Language of the case: Italian

Language of the case: Italian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 22.9.2007.

1

---
Glen Howard Hardin, Plaintiff, v. Alfred Earl Coulston, Defendant.

No. COA16-694

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 20, 2016

AFFIRMED.
Edward BATTLE, Jr., Employee v. MEADOWBROOK MEAT COMPANY, INC., Employer, Self-Insured (Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc., Third-Party Administrator).

No. 300P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 13, 2016.

Cedric R. Perry, Rocky Mount, for Battle, Edward (Jr.).

Roy G. Pettigrew, Raleigh, for Meadowbrook Meat Company, Inc., et al.

Jaye E. Bingham-Hinch, Raleigh, for Meadowbrook Meat Company, Inc., et al.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 24th of August 2015 by Plaintiff in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Withdrawn by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of April 2016."
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 135500(21) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 135500 

 COA: 278197 

Genesee CC: 04-014327-FH 

04-014328-FH 

RAYMOND HAROLD VLIET,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s June 23, 2008 

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

d0915 

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 22, 2008 

 Clerk
# C_2018134EN.01003901.xml

| 16.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/39

---

Order of the General Court of 22 February 2018 — France v Commission

(Case T-116/07) (1)

1

(2018/C 134/55)

Language of the case: French

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

---

(1)  OJ C 140, 23.6.2007.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-40747

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MAURILIO PACHECO-ALANIS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:16-CR-37-1

Before JOLLY, PRADO, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Maurilio PachecoAlanis has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Pacheco-Alanis has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 21, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-40747 Document: 00513883324 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/21/2017
No. 16-40747

2

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw 

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-40747 Document: 00513883324 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/21/2017
NO. 07-08-0153-CR

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL A

	SEPTEMBER 29, 2008

	______________________________

	MICHAEL GOFF, APPELLANT

	v.

	THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 78TH DISTRICT COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY;

	NO. 43,950-B; HON. ROY T. SPARKMAN, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

	ORDER ON APPELLANT’S MOTION TO NON-SUIT OR DISMISS APPEAL

	Before the Court is appellant’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to rule 42.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.  Rule 42.2 states that at any time before the appellate court’s decision, the appellate court may dismiss an appeal upon the appellant’s motion.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  The appellant and his attorney must sign the written motion to dismiss.  Id.  

	Upon review of appellant’s motion, all of the requirements of rule 42.2(a) have been satisfied.  The Court has considered appellant’s motion and concludes the motion should be granted and the appeal dismissed.

	Therefore, we dismiss this appeal.  

					Mackey K. Hancock

					Justice

Do not publish.
STATE v. Eric Glenn LANE

606A05-3

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 6, 2016

Daniel Shatz, Assistant Appellate Defender, Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender, for Lane, Eric Glenn.

Derrick Mertz, Special Deputy Attorney General, Nicholaos Vlahos, Assistant Attorney General, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 2nd of September 2016 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 6th of September 2016."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 12th day of October 2016 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

GREGORY DALE HAYES,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 11-30159

D.C. No. 3:09-cr-00133-RRB-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Alaska

Ralph R. Beistline, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 30, 2012** 

Anchorage, Alaska

Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

Gregory Hayes appeals from his guilty plea convictions for conspiring to make

false statements in connection with the acquisition of firearms and two counts of being

a felon in possession of firearms, which resulted in a combined fifteen-year prison

FILED

SEP 05 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
1

 In his notice of appeal, Hayes indicated he was appealing his sentence only,

but in his briefs challenges only his convictions. Because the government was able

to fully brief its responses to Hayes’s conviction appeal arguments, it was not

prejudiced by the deficient notice of appeal, and we may consider the merits of the

claim. See United States v. Yee Soon Shin, 953 F.2d 559, 560-61 (9th Cir. 1992).

2

sentence—five years for conspiracy consecutive to concurrent ten-year terms for the

felon-in-possession counts. He argues that the district court did not properly advise

him of his maximum possible sentence before he pled guilty to the three counts.

Because Hayes did not bring the claimed defect to the district court’s attention, his

conviction may be reversed only if the district court committed plain error. United

States v. Pena, 314 F.3d 1152, 1155 (9th Cir. 2003) (citing United States v. Vonn, 535

U.S. 55 (2002)). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,1

 and we affirm.

Hayes concedes government counsel correctly stated during the plea colloquy

that the maximum sentence Hayes could receive for conspiracy was five years and for

each of his firearms possession counts was ten years. He focuses his appeal on the

district court’s subsequent statements that fifteen years was “the worst [Hayes] could

do” if subject to sentencing under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Because those

statements (1) did not imply, as Hayes argues, that the sentences for the three counts

would run concurrently whether or not the Act applied, and (2) even if misleading, did

not affect Hayes’s substantial rights given that his actual sentence did not exceed
3

fifteen years, see United States v. Morales-Robles, 309 F.3d 609, 610-11 (9th Cir.

2002), there was no plain error.

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 23.1**
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACOUNTANTS**
     We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3(No. 333-64176, 333-102829, 333-105127, and 333-111595) andForm S-8 (No.’s 333-3070, 333-17209, 333-20939,333-26557, 333-28403, 333-67233 and 333-86817) of ViewpointCorporation of our report dated March 17, 2004 relating tothe consolidated financial statements and financial statementschedule which appears in this Form 10-K.
New York, New YorkMarch 30, 2004
**Exhibit 10.8(i)****NINTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT**THIS NINTH AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”) is made as of this 9th day of April, 2008to that certain EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, dated as of November 30, 1999, as heretofore 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 herebyacknowledged, Employer and Employee, being the sole parties to the Employment Agreement, herebyamend the Employment Agreement as follows:1. Subject to earlier termination otherwise set forth in the Employment Agreement, the lastday of the Employment Period shall be January 31, 2010.2. Effective May 4, 2008, Employee’s Base Salary shall be $475,000.Except as specifically amended hereby, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force andeffect according to its terms. To the extent of any conflict between the terms of this Amendmentand the terms of the remainder of the Employment Agreement, the terms of this Amendment shallcontrol and prevail. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have those respectivemeanings attributed to them in the Employment Agreement. This Amendment shall hereafter be deemed apart of the Employment Agreement for all purposes. The terms of employment set forth in thisAmendment have been approved by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of theEmployer.IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first abovewritten.         JOS. A. BANK CLOTHIERS, INC.               By: /s/ Charles D. Frazer   /s/ Robert Hensley             Charles D. Frazer,   ROBERT HENSLEY    Senior Vice President-General Counsel
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4032 

To exempt from Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 certain water transfers 

by the North Texas Municipal Water District and the Greater Texoma 

Utility Authority, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 11, 2014 

Mr. HALL (for himself, Mr. SESSIONS, and Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To exempt from Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 certain 

water transfers by the North Texas Municipal Water 

District and the Greater Texoma Utility Authority, 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 ‘‘North Texas Invasive 

5 Species Barrier Act of 2014’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 4032 IH

1 SEC. 2. COMPLIANCE WITH LACEY ACT AMENDMENT OF 

2 1981. 

3 The Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 

4 3371 et seq.) and section 42 of title 18, United States 

5 Code, shall not apply with respect to any water transfer 

6 by the North Texas Municipal Water District and the 

7 Greater Texoma Utility Authority using only closed con8 veyance systems from the Lake Texoma raw water intake 

9 structure to treatment facilities at which all genera and 

10 species prohibited in accordance with such Act or such sec11 tion, respectively, are extirpated and removed from the 

12 water transferred. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   In connection with the Quarterly Report of Trai Thien USA Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Tran Viet Thang, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my 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,  Date: May 24, 2010/s/ Tran Viet ThangTran Viet Thang
Chief Financial Officer
State of North Carolina v. Michael Anthony York

No. 63P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 9, 2016

Ms. Marilyn G. Ozer, Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill, Mr. Michael Anthony York, for York, Michael Anthony

Mr. Steven Armstrong, Assistant Attorney General, Mr. James R. O'Neill, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

**ORDER**

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 25th of February 2016 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

*4"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of June 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th of March 2016 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of June 2016."
Exhibit 10.2
 
   June 23,
2009
  Mr.
Michael Nelson
 Vernel
Co
 1 Gracie
Square
 New York,
NY 10028
 
 
  Dear
Michael,
  Five Star Group requests that Vernal
Company extend the lease in the Newington, CT facility, for 6 additional months
expiring in September, 2010. The rent will remain at thecurrent lease's
rate.
 
 
 
 
 
  Joseph
Leven
 Senior
Vice President
 Five Star
Group
 
  Agreed to
      and accepted
              Vernel Company
              Marnew Corp. General Partner
              
              /s/ Michael J Nelson
              Michael J Nelson, President
  
 
 
 
 903 Murray
Road, P.O. Box 1960, East Hanover, NJ 07936, 973.428.4600, fax
973.515.0443
# C_2009267EN.01005603.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 267/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 267/56

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 23 September 2009 — Fratex Industria e Comércio v OHIM– USA Track & Field (TRACK & FIELD USA)

(Case T-103/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for figurative Community mark TRACK & FIELD USA - Earlier national figurative mark TRACK & FIELD - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Lack of similarity between the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 [now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2009/C 267/97

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Fratex Indústria e Comércio, Ltda (São Paolo, Brasil) (represented by: B. Braga da Cruz, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: O. Mondéjar Ortuño, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: USA Track & Field, Inc (Indiana, United States of America)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of 18 January 2007 of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM (Case No R. 1061/2005-4)) concerning opposition proceedings between Fratex Indústria e Comércio, Ltda and USA Track & Field, Inc

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the application. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application.

| 2. | Orders Fratex Indústria e Comércio, Ltda to pay the costs |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Fratex Indústria e Comércio, Ltda to pay the costs

---

(1)  OJ C 140, 23.6.2007.

1

---
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.                  

###### Corporation for National and Community Service

      ( print page 4821)    
The Board of Directors of the Corporation for National and Community Service gives notice of the following meeting:

# Date and Time: 

Tuesday, February 8, 2005, 10 a.m.-12 p.m.

# Place: 

Corporation for National and Community Service, 1201 New York Avenue, NW., 8th Floor, Room 8410, Washington, DC 20525.

# Status: 

Open.

# Matters to be Considered:

 

I. Chair's Opening Remarks

II. Administration of Oath of Office for Board Members

III. Consideration of Prior Meeting's Minutes

IV. Chief Executive Officer's Report

V. Committee Reports

VI. Public Comment. To help in developing a five-year strategic plan, the Board of Directors is particularly interested in any comments from the public concerning the future goals and strategies for the Corporation over the next five years.

VII. Adjourn

# Accommodations: 

Anyone who needs an interpreter or other accommodation should notify the Corporation's contact person by 5 p.m. Friday, February 4, 2005.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        David Premo, Public Affairs Associate, Public Affairs, Corporation for National and Community Service, 8th Floor, Room 8612C, 1201 New York Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20525. Phone (202) 606-5000 ext. 278. Fax (202) 565-2784. TDD: (202) 565-2799. E-mail:                         *dpremo@cns.gov.*

Dated: January 26, 2005.

Frank R. Trinity, 

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 05-1847 Filed 1-27-05; 1:53 pm]

BILLING CODE 6050-$$-P
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. 05-18466) published on pages 54746-54747 of the issue for Friday, September 16, 2005.

Under the Federal Reserve Bank of New York heading, the entry for Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Sydney, Australia, is revised to read as follows:

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York**                     (Jay Bernstein, Bank Supervision Officer) 33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045-0001:                

*1. Commonwealth Bank of Australia*, Sydney, Australia; to engage                     *de novo*                     through its subsidiary, CommSec LLC, New York, New York, in securities brokerage, private placement services, and other transactional services, pursuant to sections 225.28(b)(7)(i), (b)(7)(iii), and (b)(7)(v) of Regulation Y.                

Comments on this application must be received by October 3, 2005.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,September 19, 2005.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 05-19032 Filed 9-22-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S