alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009019EN.01002702.xml

| 24.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/27

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 2 December 2008 — Harman International Industries v OHIM — Becker (Barbara Becker)

(Case T-212/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark Barbara Becker - Earlier Community word mark BECKER - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2009/C 19/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Harman International Industries, Inc. (Northridge, California, United States) (represented by: M. Vanhegan, Barrister)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Barbara Becker (Miami, Florida, United States) (represented by: P. Baronikians, lawyer)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 March 2007 (Case R 502/2006-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Harman International Industries, Inc. and Barbara Becker.

Operative part of the order

| 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 March 2007 (Case R 502/2006-1); |
| --- | --- |

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 March 2007 (Case R 502/2006-1);

| 2. | Dismisses as inadmissible the application of Harman International Industries, Inc., requesting that the application for registration of Barbara Becker as a Community trade mark be rejected; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses as inadmissible the application of Harman International Industries, Inc., requesting that the application for registration of Barbara Becker as a Community trade mark be rejected;

| 3. | Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and pay the costs of Harman International Industries; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and pay the costs of Harman International Industries;

| 4. | Orders Barbara Becker to bear her own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders Barbara Becker to bear her own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.

1

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

<ARTICLE>                                    5
<MULTIPLIER>                             1,000
       
<S>                                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                       DEC-25-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                          DEC-26-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                            DEC-25-1997
<CASH>                                                        4,358
<SECURITIES>                                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                88,841
<ALLOWANCES>                                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                                 102,491
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            201,396
<PP&E>                                                      177,217
<DEPRECIATION>                                                    0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              424,143
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                        99,539
<BONDS>                                                       3,456
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                             0
<PREFERRED>                                                       0
<COMMON>                                                    288,392
<OTHER-SE>                                                        0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                424,143
<SALES>                                                     490,585
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            490,585
<CGS>                                                       316,132
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               437,848
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              3,362
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            3,075
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                              46,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 15,319
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                          30,981
<DISCONTINUED>                                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                   0
<CHANGES>                                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                                 30,981
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  1.61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  1.60
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6819

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

INOCENTE ANTUNEZ JIMENEZ,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard,

District Judge. (4:01-cr-00031-H-2)

Submitted: September 16, 2008 Decided: September 23, 2008

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Inocente Antunez Jimenez, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Inocente Antunez Jimenez appeals the district court’s

order denying his motion for a reduction in sentence under 18

U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000) and its order denying his motion for

reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. United States v. Jimenez, No. 4:01-cr-00031-H2 (E.D.N.C. Apr. 28, 2008 & May 21, 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
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 502 

To repeal the sunset on the reduction of capital gains rates for individuals 

and on the taxation of dividends of individuals at capital gain rates. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 6, 2007 

Mr. CRAPO (for himself, Mr. MCCONNELL, Mr. LOTT, Mr. KYL, Mr. SMITH, 

Mr. BUNNING, Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. VITTER, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. 

SUNUNU, Mr. BURR, Mr. ENZI, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. BOND, Mr. ALLARD, 

and Mr. HAGEL) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To repeal the sunset on the reduction of capital gains rates 

for individuals and on the taxation of dividends of individuals at capital gain rates. 

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


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•S 502 IS

1 SECTION 1. REDUCTIONS IN INDIVIDUAL CAPITAL GAINS 

2 AND DIVIDENDS TAX RATE MADE PERMA3 NENT. 

4 Section 303 of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Rec5 onciliation Act of 2003 (relating to sunset of title) is re6 pealed. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
**Exhibit
        32.2**
 
 **Certification
        of Chief Financial Officer 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 filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of GigaBeam
        Corporation (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 (the “Report”),
        the undersigned as Principal Financial Officer of the Company, hereby, certifies
        pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
        the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 (i)
              the
                  Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
                  15(d) of
                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934:
                  and
 
 (ii)
              the
                  information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
                  the
                  Company.
 
 /s/Leighton
        J. Stephenson
 Name:
        Leighton J. Stephenson
 Chief
        Financial Officer
 Date:
        August 17, 2005
# C_2008301EN.01006201.xml

| 22.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/62 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/62

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 11 September 2008 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-140/05) (1)

1

(2008/C 301/107)

Language of the case: Italian

Language of the case: Italian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 132, 28.5.2005.

1

---
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3865 

AN ACT 

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. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 3865 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stop Targeting of Po3 litical Beliefs by the IRS Act of 2014’’. 

4 SEC. 2. APPLICABLE STANDARD FOR DETERMINATIONS OF 

5 WHETHER AN ORGANIZATION IS OPERATED 

6 EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PROMOTION OF SO7 CIAL WELFARE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—The standard and definitions as 

9 in effect on January 1, 2010, which are used to determine 

10 whether an organization is operated exclusively for the 

11 promotion of social welfare for purposes of section 

12 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall 

13 apply for purposes of determining the status of organiza14 tions under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue 

15 Code of 1986 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

16 (b) PROHIBITION ON MODIFICATION OF STAND17 ARD.—The Secretary of the Treasury may not (nor may 

18 any delegate of such Secretary) issue, revise, or finalize 

19 any regulation (including the proposed regulations pub20 lished at 78 Fed. Reg. 71535 (November 29, 2013)), rev21 enue ruling, or other guidance not limited to a particular 

22 taxpayer relating to the standard and definitions specified 

23 in subsection (a). 

24 (c) APPLICATION TO ORGANIZATIONS.—Except as 

25 provided in subsection (d), this section shall apply with 

26 respect to any organization claiming tax exempt status 
3 

•HR 3865 EH

1 under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

2 1986 which was created on, before, or after the date of 

3 the enactment of this Act. 

4 (d) SUNSET.—This section shall not apply after the 

5 one-year period beginning on the date of the enactment 

6 of this Act. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 26, 

2014. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3865 

AN ACT 

To prohibit the Internal Revenue Service from 

1986. tion 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of promotion of social welfare for purposes of secan organization is operated exclusively for the modifying the standard for determining whether
----

----

| 1. | The      Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of      the Company at the end of the period covered by the Quarterly      Report. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                    |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|-------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:      May 15, 2008 |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|                    | By:    | /s/      Vladimir      Fedyunin                              |
|                    |   | Vladimir      Fedyunin                                                                                                                                                                                        |
|                    |   | Chief      Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                                  |

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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                          36,810
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  240,910
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,000
<INVENTORY>                                    147,954
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,192,285
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,029,367
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 741,095
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,051,022
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     12,768
<COMMON>                                        15,673
<OTHER-SE>                                    (756,114)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   741,095
<SALES>                                      1,961,616
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,961,616
<CGS>                                        2,021,158
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,872,241
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              49,165
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (959,790)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (959,790)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,009,732)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.17)
        

</TABLE>
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00612-CV

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellant

v.

Irene V. RODRIGUEZ d/b/a Rodriguez Immigration & Office Services,

Appellee

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC-06-408

Honorable Alex William Gabert, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. López, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 24, 2008

JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS GRANTED; DISMISSED

The parties filed a joint motion to dismiss this appeal and to tax costs against appellant. We

grant the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(2). We order all costs of the appeal assessed against

appellant. 

PER CURIAM
In the MATTER OF the FORECLOSURE OF a DEED OF TRUST EXECUTED BY Donald R. BAGWELL and Sylvia J. Bagwell Dated February 26, 2003 and Recorded in Book 2910 At Page 533 in the Orange County Public Registry, North Carolina, et al.

No. 318P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 30, 2016

Donald R. Bagwell, for Bagwell, Donald R.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 26th of August 2016 by Petitioner (Donald Bagwell) for Writ of Prohibition and/or Temporary Restraining Order:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of August 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Petitioner (Donald Bagwell) on the 26th of August 2016 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Orange County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 30th of August 2016."
1692.

#### Jordan *v.*The State.

Indictment for unlawful sale of liquor, from Grady superior court — -Judge Worrill. January 13, 1909.

Submitted March 9,

Decided March 16, 1909.

*J. Q. Smith,*for plaintiff in error.

IF. *E. Woolen, solicitor-general,*contra.

Hill, C. J.

No error of law is complained of, and the verdict is supported by the evidence. *Judgment affirmed.*
NO. 01

- 15

- 00233

- CV

________________________________________

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT

HOUSTON, TEXAS

________________________________________

EL AHORRO PROPERTIES, LLC, ADVENTURE SUPERMARKETS, LLC

and ROSARA INVESTMENTS, LLC

Appellants

vs.

AYDA MARTINEZ

Appellee

_________________________________________________________________

AMENDED JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS

__________________________________________________________________

TO THE HONORABLE FIRST COURT OF APPEALS:

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1, Appellant s and

Appellee file this amended joint motion to dismiss the appeal and would

respectfully show this Court as follows:

1. The parties have reached an agreement to abate the underlying lawsuit

pending mediation and, if mediation is unsuccessful, arbitration. As a result,

Appellant s no longer wish to pursue this appeal.

2. In accordance with their agreement, the parties jointly request that the

Court grant this motion and dismiss the appeal

. ACCEPTED

01-15-00233-cv

FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

5/14/2015 9:40:26 AM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK2 3. In further accordance with their agreement, all taxable Court costs

shall be paid by the party who incurred same.

Respectfully submitted,

EGGLESTON & BRISCOE, LLP

4800 Three Allen Cent er

333 Clay Street

Houston, Texas 77002

( 713 ) 659

- 5100

– Telephone

( 713 ) 951

- 9920

– Facsimile

By: /s/ **David W. Smith**

David W. Smith

State Bar No. 24027868

dws@egglestonbriscoe.com

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT S

MOLINA LAW FIRM

11550 Fuqua, Suite 580

Houston, Texas 77034

( 281 ) 922

- 4300

– Telephone

( 281 ) 922

- 4325

– Facsimile

By:

Rick Molina /s/ **Rick Molina**

S tate Bar No. 00784621

rmolina@molinalawfirm.com

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE3 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I certify that I have conferred with Rick Molina, counsel for Appellee, and

Appellee does not oppose dismissal and has joined this motion.

__ /s/ **David W. Smith**

David W. Smith _______

I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument was served on

the following counsel of record via electronic no tification and/or facsimile on this

the 14 th day of May 201 5 : CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Rick Molina

Molina Law Firm

11550 Fuqua, Suite 580

Houston, Texas 77034

__ /s/ **David W. Smith**

David W. Smith _______
# C_2008051EN.01006001.xml

| 23.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/60

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 13 December 2007 — Estancia Piedra v OHIM — Franciscan Vineyards (ESTANCIA PIEDRA)

(Case T-159/06) (1)

1

(2008/C 51/109)

Language of the case: English

Language of the case: English

The President of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 190, 12.8.2006

1

---
JUDGMENT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE TRIBUNAL

(Second Chamber)

12 March 2009

Case F-24/07

**Virginie Lafleur Tighe**

**v**

**Commission of the European Communities**

(Civil service – Contract staff – Recruitment – Classification in grade – Former individual experts – Professional experience – Degrees – Certificate of equivalence – Admissibility – New and substantial fact)

**Application:**brought under Articles 236 EC and 152 EA, in which Mrs Lafleur Tighe essentially seeks annulment of the decision of the authority
authorised to conclude contracts of engagement classifying her in grade 13, step 1, as shown in her contract of engagement
signed on 22 December 2005.

**Held:**The action is dismissed. Each party is to bear its own costs.

**Summary**

*Officials – Actions – Prior administrative complaint – Time-limits – Mandatory – Claim barred by lapse of time – Reopening
– Condition*

*(Staff Regulations, Arts 90 and 91)*

A contract concluded between a staff member and an institution produces its effects and, therefore, is capable of adversely
affecting the staff member from the date of its signature, provided that all the details of the contract are fixed.

The time-limits prescribed in Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations, being designed to ensure legal certainty, are a
matter of public policy and are binding on the parties and the Court. Only the existence of new and substantial facts may
justify the submission of a claim seeking reconsideration of a decision, such as a decision on a staff member’s classification,
which was not challenged within the time-limits prescribed in Articles 90 and 91 of the Staff Regulations. In order for a
fact to be new, it is essential that neither the applicant nor the administration was aware of, or in a position to be aware
of, the fact in question when the previous decision, which has become definitive, was adopted. In order to be substantial,
the fact concerned must be capable of substantially altering the applicant’s situation forming the basis of the initial request
which gave rise to the previous decision which has become definitive.

(see paras 53, 55-57)

See:

231/84 *Valentini* v *Commission* [1985] ECR 3027, para. 14

T-16/97 *Chauvin* v *Commission* [1997] ECR-SC I‐A‐237 and II‐681, para. 32; T-186/98 *Inpesca* v *Commission* [2001] ECR II‐557, paras 50 and 51; T-137/99 and T-18/00 *Martínez Páramo and Others* v *Commission* [2002] ECR-SC I‐A‐119 and II‐639, para. 56; T-406/03 *Ravailhe* v *Committee of the Regions* [2005] ECR-SC I‐A‐19 and II‐79, para. 57

F-49/07 *R* v *Commission* [2008] ECR-SC I-A-1-0000 and II-A-1-0000, para. 79, on appeal before the Court of First Instance, Case T‐156/08 P; F-141/07
*Maniscalco* v *Commission* [2008] ECR-SC I‐A‐1‐0000 and II‐A‐1‐0000, para. 25