alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008171EN.01003603.xml

| 5.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/36

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 28 April 2008 — Grohe v OHIM — Compañía Roca Radiadores (ALIRA)

(Case T-315/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2008/C 171/68)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Grohe AG (Hemer, Germany) (represented by: A. Lensing-Kramer, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Compañía Roca Radiadores, SA (Barcelona, Spain)

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

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 19 June 2007 (Case R 850/2006-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Grohe AG and Compañía Roca Radiadores, SA.

Operative part of the order

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

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The applicant is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the defendant. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the defendant.

---

(1)  OJ C 235, 6.10.2007.

1

---
FY2014_Q3_10Q_EX10.1






Exhibit 10.1


NON-MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR COMPENSATION


Non-Management Directors: 


		
	•
	Each Director will receive a Board retainer of $105,000 (prorated for partial periods of service), payable in quarterly installments in arrears. 


		
	•
	Each Director will receive an annual Committee retainer of $10,000 (prorated for partial periods of service) for each Committee of which he or she is a member, payable in quarterly installments in arrears. 


		
	•
	The Chairs of the Audit Committee and the Compensation Committee will receive an additional annual Committee Chair retainer of $20,000 (prorated for partial periods of service), payable in quarterly installments in arrears, and the Chair of the Governance and Nominating will receive an additional annual Committee Chair retainer of $15,000 (prorated for partial periods of service), payable in quarterly installments in arrears.


		
	•
	Each Director will receive a quarterly deferred stock unit grant, with a value equal to $45,000 (i.e., $180,000 per year) (prorated for partial periods of service), based on the average of the high and low trading prices of the Company’s common stock averaged over the last ten trading days of the quarter.  These units will be fully vested upon crediting and will be distributed to the Director on the second anniversary of the grant date unless the Director makes an election prior to the end of the preceding calendar year to defer distribution until termination of the Director’s service on the Board.  The units will be distributed 100% in shares of the Company’s common stock. 


		
	•
	Unless the Board exempts a Director, each Director will be required to retain at all times stock representing no less than 50% of the after-tax value of exercised options and shares received upon distribution of deferred stock units until the director holds shares sufficient to meet any equity retention guidelines set forth in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines. 




 Independent Lead Director


		
	•
	The Director elected Lead Director shall receive as compensation for his or her services as Lead Director a fee of $50,000 per year in addition to the compensation received by the Director for his or service as a Director and on Committees of the Board.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-91597 of The Cronos Group on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos.
333-31108 and 333-61472 of The Cronos Group each on Form S-8, of our report
dated February 14, 2003, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of The
Cronos Group for the year ended December 31, 2002.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
San Francisco, California

March 24, 2003

                                                                        - E155 -
EXHIBIT 32



<PAGE>


In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Diamond One, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), we, Robert S. Chramosta, President and Chief
Executive Officer and Troy Fullmer,  Principal Financial Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our 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 the Company.


September 20, 2004                By:  /s/ Robert Chramosta
                                       ---------------------------------------
                                       Robert Chramosta, President and Chief
                                       Executive Officer


September 20, 2004                By: /s/ Troy Fullmer
                                      ----------------------------------------
                                      Troy Fullmer, Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-7348

ALEX D. TAYLOR,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JON OZMINT, Director SCDC,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Aiken. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. 

(1:09-cv-00915-TLW)

Submitted: March 17, 2011 Decided: April 20, 2011

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alex D. Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Lindemann, DAVIDSON & 

LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Alex D. Taylor appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying 

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. 

Taylor v. Ozmint, No. 1:09-cv-00915-TLW (D.S.C. Sept. 16, 2010). 

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
Exhibit 21.1

                       BROADVISION, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

*        BroadVision Switzerland, A.G., organized under the laws of Switzerland

*        BroadVision Franc, S.A., organized under the laws of France

*        BroadVision Germany GmBH, organized under the laws of Germany

*        BroadVision U.K., Ltd., organized under the laws of the United Kingdom

*        BroadVision Nipon Japan, organized under the laws of Japan

*        BroadVision B.V., organized under the laws of the Netherlands

*        BroadVision Asia Pacific Ltd., organized under the Companies Ordinance
         of Hong Kong



                                       66
Order entered January 24, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-01272-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF K.C.E. AND L.T.E., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-55626-2018

ORDER

Appellant has filed a Suggestion of Bankruptcy stating that he has filed for bankruptcy in 

the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Texas. This automatically 

suspends further action in this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2.

Accordingly, we ABATE this appeal. It may be reinstated on prompt motion by any 

party complying with Rule 8.3 and specifying what further action, if any, is required from this 

Court. See id. 8.3.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG 

JUSTICE
# C_2010011EN.01003802.xml

| 16.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 11/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/38

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 13 November 2009 — Lumenis v OHIM (FACES)

(Case T-301/07) (1)

1

2010/C 11/71

Language of the case: English

Language of the case: English

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

---

(1)  OJ C 247, 20.10.2007.

1

---
IEC-EX10.2_2014.06.27.10Q






Exhibit 10.2










May 22, 2014




IEC Electronics Corp.
105 Norton Street
Newark, New York 14513
Attention:  W. Barry Gilbert, CEO




Dear Barry:


This letter confirms our mutual agreement that effective as of June 1, 2014 our firm will no longer provide the chief financial officer services, performed by Vincent Leo, pursuant to the letter between us dated December 28, 2011, as amended May 25, 2012 (“Agreement”).  We understand that other terms of the Agreement survive and other arrangements between the Company and our firm remain in effect.






Very truly yours,


/s/ Insero & Company, CPAs, PC
Insero & Company CPAs, PC




Confirmed:


IEC Electronics Corp.






By:    /s/ W. Barry Gilbert
W. Barry Gilbert
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**Certification of Chief Executive 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 Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of ADESA, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas J. Caruso, as Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2) the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/   Thomas J. Caruso                  |   |
|-----------------------------------------|--------|
| Thomas   J. Caruso                      |   |
| *Chief Executive Officer and President* |   |
|                                    |   |
| Date:   April 20, 2012             |   |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4262 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4262

To apply the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act to the 
                Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 14, 2014

  Mr. Duffy introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Oversight and Government Reform, 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 apply the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act to the 
                Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Bureau Advisory Commission 
Transparency Act''.

SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF FACA.

    Section 1013 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 
U.S.C. 5493) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(h) Application of FACA.--Notwithstanding any provision of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), such Act shall apply to 
each advisory committee of the Bureau.''.
                                 <all>
```
Patrick A. Merrill v. Winston-Salem Forsyth County Board Of Education

No. 449P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2017.

Mr. Norman B. Smith, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, For Merrill, Patrick A.

Ms. Roberta King Latham, Mr. Joshua H. Bennett, Winston-Salem, Ms. Jasmine M. Pitt, Attorneys at Law, For Winston-Salem Forsyth County Board of Education

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 13th of December 2016 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:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th of January 2017."
OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

&morablr b. Aa Xadderr 

countq rttornay 

L-'ecos county 

Ft. Stookton, Terar 

. . 

~‘i 

OplAion Ho, o&o~ 

lie: Where land' ir, zpurchssed 

by sitpupder &ax i’orsclocwre, w?mrsin all 

taxiA&uanlta reqr parties, 

doea land o-1: redeem 

property by paying to 

the. county tax oo$leotor 

.J' <.' -‘4beSore second ealo by 

I 

‘a. '1 olty, the full amouAt 

., .ai county, et&e, and. 

. school district taxes, 

including penalty aad 

faterest? 

l%ar sir: 

, .,f 

!W acknowladge receipt of YOU letter oi JanUtuy $3, 

1945, re~uueatiag cur opinion relative to the sbote captioned 

matter. Your letter read4 IA part, as follows: 

"The City of Ft. Stockton, Texa8, brought oertain tax suits maklng.all taxing unit8 parties,- Judg- 

%oAt we8 taken OA DertaiA town lot8 here in City. 

,Grder of sale wua leauusd and the City a8 a taxing unit 

purchased the property, ci6te of ?urchass August 19414 

The property wan held by the city until the two year8 

std six UiOAtilS had expired, AAd 00. Nov. 7-194 bad the 

SheriPP of this GbaAtp:W refMel1 tbe property, and an 

individual i;urchasad Che city property-not the owner4 

The ownor of the property in Xarqh, 1944,-a non-residsntXaIlod to the tax ccl Isctsr the amount OS tl.e delinquent 

taxes due OA this property, iAClUdiAg QeAAlty and in- 

'Uarest, and he accepted the money aad issued receipt 

t2crefor. IIe did not colleot the 50$ of the aggregate 

~~....^ -..-..-- . --. 
16 

, 

Honorable W. A. Radden - page 2 

total amount, or double the aggregate amountan 

-provided for In Section 12 above article. The owner 

did not gay the city taxes and has not yet done so, ’ 

only paid the County Tax Collector the amount due 

State, County and School Dietriot, The 0~1~61: claimm 

be ha8 redeemed the property by paying the taxerr to 

the tax collector. The present omsr olalmm the 

property for the reason that be bid it in at last 

sale, and on aocount of the failure of the owner to 

pay the double amouht nsceesary to redeem and did 

not pay the City Taxes.* 

It is clear from your statement of the fact@, that 

the owner has not redeemed said land as provided by Section 12, 

Article 7345b, Y. A. C. 3 . , and inasmuoh as the city has m-de 

a st3cor.d sale of s&Id land, his right to redeem is now foreclosed. Trusting that the above and foregoing fully answer6 

your inquiry, w4 ara 

Yours very truly 

AT’lWtNEY GGNEBAL OF TWXAS 

WVG: iw 

ASslstant
IN RE: A.P.

145P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 9, 2017

Anne C. Wright, Attorney at Law, Boone, for Powell, Kylah.

Christopher C. Peace, Attorney at Law, Keith T. Roberson, Attorney at Law, for Mecklenburg County DSS.

Matthew D. Wunsche, GAL Appellate Counsel, for GAL.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of May 2017 by Petitioner for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2017."
The Honora ble Russell G. Clark, United States District Judge for the Western 1 District of Missouri. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-2793

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the Unite d States v. * District Court for the * Western District o f Missouri Kenneth Wayne Smith, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: November 6, 199 7 Filed:

___________ Bef ore McMILLIAN, BEAM, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD , Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Wayne Smith appeals from the final judgmen t entered in the District Court for the Western District o f 1 Miss ouri after Smith pleaded guilty to three counts o f alte ring odometer readings, in violation of 49 U.S.C
. § 32703(2) . The district court imposed three concurrent sentences of 18 months in prison and one year supervised-2-

rele ase. Smith now challenges his sentences, arguin g that the district court erred in-3-

appl ying an enhancement for more than minimal plannin g pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manua l § 2F1.1(b)(2) (1995).
We conclude the district court did not clearly err i n asse ssing the enhancement, because it was undispute d that, over a period of several months, Smith had altered odometer readings on nineteen vehicles. See id. § 1B1.1, comm ent. (n.1(f)) (more than minimal planning deeme d present in any case involving repeated acts over perio d of t ime, unless it is clear each instance was purel y opportune) , .3(a) (court to consider all acts committed by defe ndant); United States v. Sykes , 4 F.3d 697, 699

- 700 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam) (repetitive nature o f criminal conduct, alone, may warrant increase)
. Moreover, it was undisputed that after Smith altered the odom eters, he instructed another individual to sell th e vehicles at auctions using the names of sales companie s with which he had no affiliation. Cf. United States v
. Gjerde , 110 F.3d 595, 604-05 (8th Cir.) (more tha n minimal planning where def endant & s scheme to fraudulently obta in loan involved approving loan, placing hold o n accounts, and misrepresenting financing and purchase o f equi pment), petition for cert. filed , 66 U.S.L.W. 315 7 (U.S. Aug. 11, 1997) (No. 97-265); United States v
. Starr , 986 F.2d 281, 282 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam ) (ban k fraud involved more than minimal planning wher e defendant opened one account using alias, but closed it six months later; later opened account at different bank using diff erent alias; and then directed acquaintance to depo sit check written on closed account into othe r account).-4-

Accordingly, we affirm. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
**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 Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of ADESA, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Eric M. Loughmiller, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2) the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/   Eric M. Loughmiller                              |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Eric   M. Loughmiller                                  |   |
| *Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer* |   |
|                                                   |   |
| Date:   April 20, 2012                            |   |

 

----
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

 

2008-7039 

NIKOLAS PROCELL, 

Claimant-Appellant, 

v. 

JAMES B. PEAKE, M.D., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

Micah S. Myers, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr, LLP, of Washington, DC, 

argued for claimant-appellant. Mark R. Lippman, The Veterans Law Group, of La Jolla, 

California, for claimant-appellant. 

Martin F. Hockey, Jr., Assistant Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil 

Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for 

respondent-appellee. With him on the brief were Gregory G. Katsas, Acting Assistant 

Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director. Of counsel on the brief were Ethan G. 

Kalett, Supervisory Attorney, and Tracey P. Warren, Attorney, Office of the General 

Counsel, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC. 

Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 

Judge William A. Moorman 
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

2008-7039 

NIKOLAS PROCELL, 

Claimant-Appellant, 

v. 

JAMES B. PEAKE, M.D., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

Judgment 

ON APPEAL from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims 

In CASE NO(S). 05-2510. 

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

Per Curiam (RADER, PLAGER, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED: _October 10, 2008__ / s / Jan Horbaly

 Jan Horbaly, Clerk
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40711

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ELISEO GARCIA

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:-06-CR-522-11

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Eliseo Garcia has moved for leave to

withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967). Garcia has filed a response. 

The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration, at this time,

of Garcia’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Such claims, generally,

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 18, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-40711

2

“cannot be resolved on direct appeal when [they have] not been raised before the

district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of

the allegations”. United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006)

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Our independent review of the

record, counsel’s brief, and Garcia’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for

appeal. 

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. Garcia’s motion for the appointment of new counsel is

DENIED.