alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008051EN.01002701.xml

| 23.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/27

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 December 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-284/07) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2005/51/EC - Public procurement - Procedures for the award of contracts - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2008/C 51/44)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: A. Caeiros, D. Kukovec and P. Andrade, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: M.L. Fernandes, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the period prescribed, the measures necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2005/51/EC of 7 September 2005 amending Annex XX to Directive 2004/17/EC and Annex VIII to Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on public procurement (OJ 2005 L 257, p. 127)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2005/51/EC of 7 September 2005 amending Annex XX to Directive 2004/17/EC and Annex VIII to Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on public procurement, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2005/51/EC of 7 September 2005 amending Annex XX to Directive 2004/17/EC and Annex VIII to Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on public procurement, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Portuguese to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Portuguese to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.

1

---
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

September 26, 2008

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 08-10924

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 06-00234-CV-3-MCR-MD

IN RE: In The Matter of Backcountry Outfitters, Inc., 

 a Florida Corporation as owner of a 2002 

 22' Cape Horn motor vessell named Backcountry 

 bearing hull identification No. FAB22047E202, 

__________________________________________________ 

LARRY MCFERREN, 

Respondent-Third-PartyPlaintiff-Appellant, 

versus 

JASON MICHAEL DUDLEY, 

 

Third-Party-Defendant, 

versus 

IN THE MATTER OF BACKCOUNTRY OUTFITTERS, INC., 

a Florida corporation as owner of a 2002 22' 

Cape Horn motor vessell named Backcountry 

bearing hull indentification No. FAB22047E202, 

Third-Party-DefendantAppellee. 
2

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Florida

_________________________

(September 26, 2008)

Before TJOFLAT, BLACK and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Larry McFerren, who suffered personal injuries in a boating accident,

appeals a post-trial judgment of limitation of liability in favor of Backcountry

Outfitters, Inc., the owner of the vessel involved in the accident. Because the

district court did not clearly err in its findings that the vessel was seaworthy and

the negligence of the captain was not within the privity or knowledge of the owner,

we affirm.

McFerren contends that the vessel was unseaworthy for having inadequate

equipment and an incompetent crew and the accident was within the privity or

knowledge of Backcountry, but we disagree. The findings of the district court that

the vessel “was outfitted with all safety equipment that was required by the U.S.

Coast Guard for bay and in-shore use” and that the licensed and experienced

captain was competent are supported by the record. The findings of the district

court that the accident was caused by the captain’s navigational error, which was
3

not within the privity or knowledge of the owner, is also not clearly erroneous.

The judgment of limitation of liability in favor of Backcountry is

AFFIRMED.
FREDDERICK HINES,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-2819

_____________________________/

Opinion filed October 8, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.

Mark W. Moseley, Judge.

Fredderick Hines, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

VAN NORTWICK, RAY, AND OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
# C_2008064EN.01002001.xml

| 8.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/20

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 12 December 2007 — College van burgemeester en wethouders van Rotterdam v M.E.E. Rijkeboer

(Case C-553/07)

(2008/C 64/29)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: College van burgemeester en wethouders van Rotterdam

Appellant:

Respondent: M.E.E. Rijkeboer

Respondent:

Question referred

Is the restriction, provided for in the Netherlands Law on local-authority personal records, on the communication of data to one year prior to the relevant request compatible with Article 12(a) of Directive 95/46/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, whether or not read in conjunction with Article 6(1)(e) of that directive and the principle of proportionality?

1

---

(1)  OJ 1995 L 281, p. 31.

1

---
This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 92-1004-CR, styled The State of Texas v. Robert Guidroz, filed in

1

the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas, the Honorable Dwight E. Peschel presiding.

i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-08-00618-CR

IN RE Robert GUIDROZ

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. Lopez, Chief Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 17, 2008

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

Robert Guidroz seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the trial court to rule on his motion

for judgment nunc pro tunc addressing jail credit. This court is authorized to issue a writ of

mandamus to compel a trial court to consider and rule on a nunc pro tunc motion addressing presentence jail credit. Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147, 148-49 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004); In re Isbell,

No. 04-06-00558-CV, 2006 WL 3206075, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio, November 8, 2006, orig.

proceeding) (mem. op.). However, a relator has the burden of providing this court with a record

sufficient to establish a right to mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a) (“Relator must file

with the petition [ ] a certified orsworn copy of every document that is material to the relator’s claim
04-08-00618-CR

-2-

for relief and that was filed in any underlying proceeding”); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(j)(1)(A).

Here, Guidroz has not provided this court with a copy of his motion or any other documents to

support his claim for relief. Nor has Guidroz established that the trial court has been made aware

of his motion or has expressly refused to rule on it. See In re Isbell, 2006 WL 3206075, at *2

(conditionally granting mandamus relief when the record showed the trial court was made aware of

the nunc pro tunc motion but nevertheless failed to consider and rule on it). We conclude that

Guidroz has not shown himself entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition is denied.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 13 - 00340 - CV VICKIE ANN SAMARRON, APPELLANT

V. REGENCE HEALTH NETWO RK, INC., APPELLEE On Appeal from the 222nd District Court Deaf Smith County, Texas Trial Court No. CI - 12K

- 118, Honorable Roland D. Saul, Presiding January 14 , 2014 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Appellant Vickie Ann Samarron has filed a motion to dismiss her appeal, signed by appellant’s attorney, because the parties have resolved their issues. Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. Brian Quinn Chief Justice
Leavitt v. Hargrove

268P16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016

Owen D. Leavitt, for Leavitt, Owen Deshawn.

Paul J. Stainback, Attorney at Law, Henderson, for Hargrove, Willie.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 14th of July 2016 by Plaintiff to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of August 2016."
----

----

|  | SAK Consulting (Canada) Inc.       2200-1066 West Hastings Street       Vancouver, BC V6E 3X2 

**T: +1.604.681.4196           F: +1.604.687.5532**          vancouver@srk com           www srk.com |
|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

**CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON**

I, **Adrian Dance**,confirm that:

I am the Qualified Person for the **Metallurgical Testwork and Process Plant Design** section of the Amended **Annual Information Form** (“Amended AIF”) of Nevsun Resources Ltd. dated April 19, 2018.

I have read NationalInstrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”)and understand these Standards as pertains to the work for which I amresponsible as disclosed in the Amended AIF.

I am an AssociateConsultant (Metallurgy) with SRK Consulting (Canada) Ltd with an office at2200-1066 West Hastings Street, Vancouver, BC, V6E 3X2, Canada. I am a graduateof the University of British Columbia in 1987 where I obtained a Bachelor ofApplied Science and a graduate of the University of Queensland in 1992 where Iobtained a Doctorate. I have practiced my profession continuously since 1992including thirteen years as a consultant and have experience working in anumber of gold operations around the world.

I am a ProfessionalEngineer registered with the Association of Professional Engineers &Geoscientists of British Columbia, license # 37151. I am a Qualified Person asdefined in NI 43-101, having 26 years of experience which is relevant to thestyle of mineralization and type of deposits described in the Amended AIF, and to theactivity for which I am accepting responsibility.

I have reviewed theAmended AIF to which  statement of consent applies.

I am independent ofthe issuer as described by Section 1.5 of NI 43-101.

I verify that theinformation in the Amended AIF is based on and fairly and accurately reflects in theform and context in which it appears, the information in my supportingdocumentation relating to **Metallurgical Testwork and Process Plant Design**.

I consent to therelease of the Amended AIF and this statement of consent by Nevsun Resources Ltd.

Dated this 19th day of April 2018.

*“Adrian Dance”*

__________________________       

Adrian Dance PhD, PEng

|              | **U.S. Offices:** | **Canadian Offices:** | **Group Offices:** |
|--------------|-------------------|-----------------------|--------------------|
| Anchorage    | 907 677 3520      | Saskatoon             | 306 955 4778       | Africa |
| Denver       | 303 985.1333      | Sudbury               | 705.682.3270       | Asia |
| Elko         | 775 753 4151      | Toronto               | 416 601 1445       | Australia |
| Fort Collins | 970 407 8302      | Vancouver             | 604 681.4196       | Europe |
| Reno         | 775 828 6800      | Yellowknife           | 867.873.8670       | North America |
| Tucson       | 520 544 3688      |                  |               | South America |

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999             DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                              13                      30
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    13                   3,016
<PP&E>                                          17,379                  14,218
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (8,622)                   5,465
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 321,690                 234,689
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          561,719                 467,368
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                       276,887                 237,762
<OTHER-SE>                                   (516,916)               (463,441)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   321,690                 234,689
<SALES>                                              0                  66,422
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                  66,422
<CGS>                                                0                  57,230
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                  57,230
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,219,010               1,753,537
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,219,010)             (1,736,543)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,219,010)             (1,736,543)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,219,010)             (1,736,543)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.00)                   (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)                   (.01)


</TABLE>
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:*                         National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel, Small Grants Program for Cancer Epidemiology and Cancer Research Small Grant Program.                    

*Date:*                         November 8-10, 2005.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Doubletree Hotel & Executive Meeting Center, 1750 Rockville Pike, Regency Meeting Room, Rockville, MD 20852.                     

*Contact Person:*                         Mary Jane Slesinski, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Special Review and Resources Branch, DEA/NCI/NIH, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 8045, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301/594-1566,                         *slesinsm@mail.nih.gov*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: September 16, 2005.

Anthony M. Coelho, Jr., 

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 05-19178 Filed 9-26-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

    We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-72533, 333-80721, 333-80725 and 333-55848) of
First Virtual Communications, Inc. (formerly, FVC.COM, Inc.) of our report dated
January 23, 2001, except for Note 11 for which the date is March 14, 2001 and
Note 13 for which the date is March 22, 2001, relating to the consolidated
financial statements of First Virtual Communications, Inc., which appears in
this Form 10-K.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

San Jose, California
March 30, 2001
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0455

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

KEITH STACY LEONARD,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including December 14, 2022, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 10 2022

11/10/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0455
# C_2008285EN.01003901.xml

| 8.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 285/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 285/39

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 24 September 2008 — Anvil Knitwear v OHIM — Aprile e Aprile (Aprile)

(Case T-179/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark Aprile - Earlier national word mark ANVIL - Relative ground for refusal - Lack of likelihood of confusion - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Articles 8(1)(b), 73 and 74 of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2008/C 285/71)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Anvil Knitwear, Inc. (New York, New York, United States) (represented by: G. Würtenberger, R. Kunze and T. Wittmann, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Laitinen and O. Mondéjar Ortuño, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Aprile e Aprile Srl (Argelato, Italy)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 March 2007 (Case R-1076/2006-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Anvil Knitwear, Inc. and Aprile e Aprile Srl.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Anvil Knitwear, Inc. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Anvil Knitwear, Inc. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.

1

---
In the Matter of J.A., B.A.

No. COA15-1255.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

July 19, 2016.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 10.2

 

FIRST AMENDMENT

TO THE

AMENDED AND RESTATED STOCK OPTION PLAN

FOR NONEMPLOYEE DIRECTORS

 

INTRODUCTION

 

WHEREAS, at the April 30, 2014 Annual Shareholders Meeting, Winmark Corporation’s shareholders approved an Amendment to the Stock Option Plan for Nonemployee Directors to increase the total number of shares available for options under the plan from 300,000 to 350,000.

 

AMENDMENT

 

1.             Section 6 (a) of the Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan for Nonemployee Directors is amended and restated in its entirety as follows:

 

“General.  There will be reserved and available for issuance upon the exercise of Options granted from time to time under the Plan an aggregate of Three Hundred Fifty Thousand (350,000) shares of the Stock.  Such shares may consist, in whole or in part, of authorized but unissued shares of Stock or issued shares that have been reacquired by the Company.  If any shares subject to an Option are not issued because the Option is not exercised, such shares will again be available for distribution in connection with future options.”