alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 184 (Friday, September 23, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 55925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19097]


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

LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION


Sunshine Act Meeting of the Board of Directors

Time and Date: The Finance Committee (``Committee'') of the Legal 
Services Corporation (``LSC'') Board of Directors will meet on 
September 30, 2005. The meeting will begin at 9 a.m., and continue 
until conclusion of the Committee's business.

Location: 3333 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20007, 3rd Floor 
Conference Room.

Status of Meeting: Open.

Matters To Be Considered: 
    1. Approval of agenda.
    2. Approval of the minutes of the Committee's meeting of July 28, 
2005.
    3. Presentation of LSC's Eleven-Month Financial Report (through 
August 31, 2005).
    4. Report on Status of LSC's FY 2006 Appropriation.
    5. Presentation of the Justice Gap Report.
    6. Consider and Act on LSC's FY 2007 Budget Request.
    a. Presentation by ABA.
    b. Presentation by NLADA.
    c. Presentation by LSC Management.
    d. Other Public Comment.
    7. Consider and act on other business.
    8. Consider and act on adjournment of meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Batie, Manager of Board 
Operations at (202) 295-1500.

Special Needs: Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in 
alternate formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments. 
Individuals who have a disability and need an accommodation to attend 
the meeting may notify Patricia Batie at (202) 295-1500.

    Dated: September 21, 2005.
Victor M. Fortuno,
Vice President for Legal Affairs, General Counsel & Corporate 
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-19097 Filed 9-21-05;8:53 am]
BILLING CODE 7050-01-P
# C_2010100EN.01003801.xml

| 17.4.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 100/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 100/38

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten v OHIM — Applus Servicios Tecnológicos (A+)

(Case T-321/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark A+ - Earlier Community word mark AirPlus International - Relative grounds for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Lack of similarity between the signs - Duty to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Articles 8(1)(b) and (5), 73, 74 and 79 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Articles 8(1)(b) and (5), 75, 76 and 83 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2010/C 100/58

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten GmbH (Neu-Isenburg, Germany) (represented by G. Würtenberger, R. Kunze and T. Wittman, lawyers)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court: Applus Servicios Tecnológicos, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by E. Torner Lasalle, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 June 2007 (Case R 310/2006-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten GmbH and Applus Servicios Tecnológicos, SL.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Lufthansa AirPlus Servicekarten GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 269, 10.11.2007.

1

---
**Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 29 November 2007 – Weber v Commission**

**(Case C‐107/07 P)**

Appeal – Refusal of access to documents – Manifest inadmissibility

1.                     *Appeals – Grounds – Error of law relied on not identified – Inadmissible (Art. 225 EC; Rules of Procedure of the Court, Arts
112(1)(c), and 119) (see paras 22-24)*

2.                     *Procedure – Application initiating proceedings – Formal requirements (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21; Rules of Procedure
of the Court, Art. 112(1)(c)) (see paras 25-28)*

**Re:**

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Appeal against the order of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 11 December 2006 in Case T-290/05 | Weber | v | Commission | by which the Court of First Instance dismissed as inadmissible an action brought against the decision of the Secretary-General of the Commission of 27 May 2005 rejecting the applicant’s request for access to a letter sent by the Directorate-General for Competition to the German Federal Government concerning State aid proceedings in relation to the financing of public-law broadcasting bodies in Germany. |

**Operative part**

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | The appeal is dismissed; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | Mr Weber is ordered to pay the costs. |
STATE v. James L. JOHNSON

151PA16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 14, 2016

Jeffrey William Gillette, Attorney at Law, for Johnson, James.

J. Rick Brown, Associate Attorney General, J. Joy Strickland, Assistant Attorney General, Greg Newman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 14th of September 2016 by State of NC:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 14th of September 2016."

State of NC shall have up to and including the 28th day of September 20 16 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 136890 Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 136890 

 COA: 285085 

Genesee CC: 04-014768-FC 

THEODORE HAROLD NOVAK, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 5, 2008 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

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
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered PublicAccounting Firm**

 

The Board of Directors

Jos. A. Bank Clothiers, Inc.:

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-103962, 333-85426, 333-57492 and 333-20363)of Jos. A. Bank Clothiers, Inc. of our report dated March 25, 2004 (April 13,2005, as to the effects of Note 2), with respect to the consolidated balancesheet of Jos. A. Bank Clothiers, Inc. and subsidiaries as of January 31,2004, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity,and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended January 31,2004, which report appears in the January 29, 2005 annual report on Form 10-Kof Jos. A. Bank Clothiers, Inc.

 

As described in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, theCompany has restated its consolidated financial statements in order to correctcertain errors in its accounting for leases.

 
| /s/ KPMG LLP        |   |
|---------------------|--------|
|                |
| Baltimore, Maryland |
| April 13, 2005 |

 

1

----
Exhibit 31.1

        Section 302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and
                         Chief Financial Officer


I, Jimmy B. Holton, certify that:

  1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of
Develocap, Inc.

  2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any
untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
the period covered by this quarterly report;

  3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present
in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented
in this quarterly report;

  4.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and
have:

    a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report
is being prepared;

    b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing
date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

    c)  presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

  5.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and
the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

    a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability
to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
internal controls; and

    b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
internal controls.

  6.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated
in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes
in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly
affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: June 18, 2004






/s/ Jimmy B. Holton
-------------------------
Jimmy B. Holton
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 402 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 402

      To provide for the retention of the name of Mount McKinley.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 23, 2013

 Mr. Ryan of Ohio introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To provide for the retention of the name of Mount McKinley.

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

SECTION 1. RETENTION OF NAME OF MOUNT MCKINLEY.

    Notwithstanding any other authority of law, the mountain located 63 
degrees 04 minutes 12 seconds north, by 151 degrees 00 minutes 18 
seconds west shall continue to be named and referred to for all 
purposes as Mount McKinley.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2009032EN.01003501.xml

| 7.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/35

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 25 November 2008 — Fastweb v Commission

(Case T-188/07) (1)

1

(State aid - Subsidised purchase of digital decoders - Telecommunications - Commission decision declaring the aid to be incompatible with the common market - Decision adopted in the course of the present proceedings by the Member State not to effect recovery of the aid from the company which contested the Commission's decision in annulment proceedings - No longer any interest in bringing proceedings - No need to adjudicate)

(2009/C 32/66)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Fastweb SpA (Milan, Italy) (represented by: M. Merola and T. Ubaldi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Martenczuk, G. Conte and E. Righini, Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: Sky Italia Srl (Rome, Italy) (represented by: F. González Díaz and D. Gerard, lawyers); and Centro Europa 7 Srl (Rome) (represented by: R. Mastroianni, F. Ferraro and M. Condinanzi, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2007/374/EC of 24 January 2007 on State aid C 52/2005 (ex NN 88/2005, ex CP 101/2004) implemented by the Italian Republic for the subsidised purchase of digital decoders (OJ 2007 L 147, p. 1).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.

| 2. | Each party shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Each party shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 170 of 21.7.2007.

1

---
EXHIBIT 23

<PAGE>






INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the  incorporation  by reference  in  Registration  Statement  No.
33-92224  of Mid  Continent  Bancshares,  Inc.  on Form S-8 of our report  dated
November  12, 1996  appearing  in and  incorporated  by reference in this Annual
Report  on Form  10-K of Mid  Continent  Bancshares,  Inc.  for the  year  ended
September 30, 1996.





/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP
Kansas City, Missouri
December 23, 1996
# C_2008107EN.01000801.xml

| 26.4.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 107/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.4.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 March 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v French Republic

(Case C-89/07) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Employment in the public service - Posts of master (captain) and officer (chief mate) on board all ships flying the flag of a Member State - Condition of nationality)

(2008/C 107/11)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Rozet, acting as Agent)

Applicant:

Defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and O. Christmann, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Article 39(4) EC — Free movement of workers — Exercise of public power — Requirement of French nationality for the pursuit of employment as master (captain) and officer (chief mate) on all vessels flying the French flag — Incompatible with Community law

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by maintaining in its legislation a requirement of French nationality for access to the posts of master (captain) and officer (chief mate) on all vessels flying the French flag, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 39 EC. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by maintaining in its legislation a requirement of French nationality for access to the posts of master (captain) and officer (chief mate) on all vessels flying the French flag, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 39 EC.

| 2. | Orders the French Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 95, 28.4.2007.

1

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

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       2,526,360
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  976,925
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,395,591
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,350,773
<PP&E>                                       1,804,439
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,141,999
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,753,626
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          418,938
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,616,000
<COMMON>                                        35,141
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,553,397
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,753,626
<SALES>                                        818,895
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               818,895
<CGS>                                          547,428
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  801,019
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               107,480
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (637,032)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (637,032)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (637,032)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.53)


</TABLE>
J-S79026-18

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

IN RE: NAME CHANGE OF STEPHEN 

ANDREW REMENTER

APPEAL OF: STEPHEN ANDREW 

REMENTER

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

 PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 1379 MDA 2018

Appeal from the Order Entered July 25, 2018

In the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County 

Civil Division at No(s): 2018-2887

BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., OLSON, J., and MUSMANNO, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY OLSON, J.: FILED: JANUARY 10, 2019

Appellant, Stephen Andrew Rementer, appeals pro se from the July 25, 

2018 order dismissing his petition for name change. We affirm.

As our resolution of this appeal is based on the procedural posture of 

this case, we decline to set forth the factual background. On July 20, 2018,

Appellant filed a petition to proceed in forma pauperis and a petition for name 

change. On July 25, 2018, the trial court dismissed the petition for name 

change and denied Appellant’s petition to proceed in forma pauperis. This 

timely appeal followed. On August 28, 2018, the trial court ordered Appellant 

to file a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal (“concise 

statement”). See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b). That order complied with all of the 

requirements set forth in Rule 1925(b)(3). Appellant did not file a concise 

statement. 
J-S79026-18

- 2 -

It is axiomatic that failure to file a court-ordered concise statement 

waives all appellate issues. U.S. Bank, N.A. for Certificateholders of LXS 

2007-7N Tr. Fund v. Hua, 193 A.3d 994, 998 (Pa. Super. 2018). As 

Appellant failed to file the court-ordered concise statement, he waived all of 

his appellate issues. See id.; Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)(4)(vii). Moreover, even if 

Appellant filed a concise statement, we would affirm. Appellant is prohibited 

from obtaining a name change because of his prior conviction for raping a 

child. See 54 Pa.C.S.A. § 702(c)(2); Commonwealth v. Rementer, 87 A.3d 

388, 2013 WL 11255667 (Pa. Super. 2013) (unpublished memorandum).

Order affirmed. 

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 01/10/2019
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                       RENAL CARE GROUP, INC. SUBSIDIARIES


1.       RCG Mississippi, Inc.
2.       Renal Care Group of the Midwest, Inc.
3.       Renal Care Group Texas, Inc.
4.       D.M.N. of Indiana Corporation
5.       RCG University Division, Inc.
6.       Renal Care Group of the Southeast, Inc.
7.       Renal Care Group East, Inc.
8.       Renal Care Group Arizona, Inc.
9.       Northeast Alabama Kidney Clinic, Inc.
10.      Dialysis Management Corporation
11.      RCG PA Merger Corp.
12.      RCG Indiana, LLC
13.      RenaLab, Inc.
14.      RCG Finance, Inc.
15.      RenalPartners, Inc.
16.      RenalNet, Inc.
17.      RenalNet Florida, Inc.
18.      R.C.G. Supply Company
19.      RCG Brandon, LLC
20.      RCG Pikeville, LLC
21.      RCG Southaven, LLC
22.      Southern Ocean County Dialysis Clinic, LLC
23.      Renal Institute of Central Jersey, LLC
24.      Saint Louis Renal Care, LLC
25.      Saint Louis Supply Company, LLC
26.      Ohio Renal Care Group, LLC
27.      Ohio Renal Care Supply Company, LLC
28.      Elyria Renal Care, LLC
29.      Wound Care Group, Inc.
30.      STAT Dialysis Corporation
31.      Brownsville Kidney Center, Ltd.
32.      El Paso Kidney Center East, Ltd.
33.      Angleton Dialysis, Inc.
34.      Brazoria Kidney Center, Inc.
35.      Fondren Dialysis Clinic, Inc.
36.      Wharton Dialysis, Inc.
37.      Stuttgart Dialysis, LLC
38.      KDCO, Inc.
39.      Little Rock Dialysis, Inc.
40.      Jefferson County Dialysis, Inc.
41.      Lawton Dialysis, Inc.
42.      Northwest Dialysis, Inc.
43.      Four State Regional Dialysis Center, Inc.
44.      Fort Scott Regional Dialysis Center, Inc.
45.      Miami Regional Dialysis Center, Inc.
46.      RCG/Saint Luke's, LLC
47.      Renal Care Group Michigan, Inc.
48.      RCG  Martin, LLC
49.      Renal Care Group Northwest, Inc.
50.      Pacific Northwest Renal Services, LLC
51.      Michigan Home Dialysis Center, Inc.
52.      RCG Columbus, L.L.C.
53.      RCG Lake Village, LLC
54.      RCG Mayersville, LLC
55.      Summit Renal Care, LLC
56.      RenalNet Arizona, Inc.
57.      Wisconsin Renal Care Group, L.L.C.
58.      SSKG Inc.
59.      Dialysis Centers of America - Illinois, Inc.
60.      Renal Care Group Alaska, Inc.
61.      Renal Care Group Southwest Holdings, Inc.
62.      Renal Care Group Southwest, L.P.
63.      RCG West Health Supply, L.C.
64.      Kidney Disease Centers of the Ozarks, LLC
65.      Renal Care Group Beaumont, L.P.
66.      Renal Care Group Ohio, Inc.
67.      Physicians Dialysis Company
68.      Diabetes Care Group, Inc.
69.      RCG Memphis, LLC
70.      Renal Care Group-Harlingen, L.P.
71.      Renal Care Group South New Mexico, LLC
72.      Overland Trails Renal Care Group, LLC
73.      Inland  Northwest Renal Care Group, LLC
74.      Inland Northwest Renal Care Group-Idaho, LLC
75.      Three Rivers Dialysis Services, LLC
76.      Lakewood Dialysis Services, LLC