alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 4, 2016

No. 04-16-00452-CR

Jose Guadalupe AGUIRRE,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR7206

Honorable Lorina I. Rummel, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On July 28, 2016, this court abated this cause to the trial court for findings of fact and 

conclusions of law regarding the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion to suppress. On July 

29, 2016, five volumes of the reporter’s record were filed. Volume five contains the trial court’s 

findings and conclusions.

Appellant’s brief is due August 29, 2016.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 4th day of August, 2016.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
**Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 31 January 2008 – Commission v France**

**(Case C‐147/07)**

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directives 80/778/EEC and 98/83/EC – Quality of water intended for human consumption – Maximum concentrations of nitrates and pesticides – Incorrect application

1.                     *Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Examination of merits by the Court – Situation to be taken into consideration
– Situation on expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned opinion (Art. 226 EC) (see para. 14)*

2.                     *Actions for failure to fulfil obligations – Subject-matter of the dispute – Determination during the procedure prior to the
action (Art. 226 EC) (see paras 18-19)*

**Re:**

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, the measures necessary to comply with Article 4 of Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (OJ 1998 L 330, p. 32) – Failure, in certain | départements | , to remain within the chemical parameters laid down in Annex I, Part B, to Directive 98/83 – Nitrates and pesticides. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Declares that, by failing to take the measures necessary to comply with Article 4 of Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |

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

###### Securities and Exchange Commission

          - [File No. 500-1] 

It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of Courtside Products, Inc. (“Courtside”). The Commission is concerned that Courtside may have unjustifiably relied on Rule 504 of Regulation D of the Securities Act of 1933 in conducting an unlawful distribution of its securities which failed to comply with the resale restrictions of Regulation D. Courtside, a company that has made no public filings with the Commission or the NASD, is quoted on the Pink Sheets under the ticker symbol CSDP, and has recently been the subject of spam e-mail touting the company's shares. 

The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the protection of investors require a suspension of trading in the securities of the above listed company. 

Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the above listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. e.s.t. January 28, 2005 through 11:59 p.m. e.s.t., on February 10, 2005. 

      ( print page 5259)    
By the Commission. 

Jonathan G. Katz, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 05-1910 Filed 1-28-05; 3:01 pm] 

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-6882

CHARLES EDWARD COFFEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise M. Flanagan, Chief

District Judge. (5:06-hc-02047-FL)

Submitted: September 26, 2006 Decided: October 2, 2006

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Edward Coffey, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Charles Edward Coffey, a federal prisoner, appeals the

district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241

(2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no

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

the district court. Coffey v. Stansberry, No. 5:06-hc-02047-FL

(E.D.N.C. Apr. 18, 2006). 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
IB 

Union Calendar No. 308 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4192 

[Report No. 113–418] 

To amend the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to regulate the height of buildings 

in the District of Columbia’’ to clarify the rules of the District of 

Columbia regarding human occupancy of penthouses above the top story 

of the building upon which the penthouse is placed. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 11, 2014 

Mr. ISSA (for himself and Ms. NORTON) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

APRIL 28, 2014 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4192 RH

A BILL 

To amend the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to regulate the height 

of buildings in the District of Columbia’’ to clarify the 

rules of the District of Columbia regarding human occupancy of penthouses above the top story of the building 

upon which the penthouse is placed. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4192 RH

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

3 SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF RULES APPLYING TO 

4 HUMAN OCCUPANCY OF PENTHOUSES IN DIS5 TRICT OF COLUMBIA BUILDINGS. 

6 (a) PERMITTING HUMAN OCCUPANCY OF PENT7 HOUSES WITHIN CERTAIN HEIGHT LIMIT.—The eighth 

8 paragraph of section 5 of the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to regu9 late the height of buildings in the District of Columbia’’, 

10 approved June 1, 1910 (sec. 6–601.05(h), D.C. Official 

11 Code) is amended by striking ‘‘and no floor or compart12 ment thereof shall be constructed or used for human occu13 pancy above the top story of the building upon which such 

14 structures are placed’’ and inserting ‘‘and, except in the 

15 case of a penthouse which is erected to a height of one 

16 story of 20 feet or less above the level of the roof, no floor 

17 or compartment thereof shall be constructed or used for 

18 human occupancy above the top story of the building upon 

19 which such structures are placed’’. 

20 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

21 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enact22 ment of this Act. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 308 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4192 

[Report No. 113–418] 

A BILL 

To amend the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to regulate the 

penthouse is placed. the top story of the building upon which the regarding human occupancy of penthouses above to clarify the rules of the District of Columbia height of buildings in the District of Columbia’’ 

APRIL 28, 2014 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-1177

SENN FREIGHT LINES INC.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Anderson. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (8:18-cv-00226-TMC)

Submitted: September 27, 2019 Decided: October 7, 2019

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Louis H. Lang, CALLISON TIGHE & ROBINSON, LLC, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellant. Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Abby C. Wright, Casen B. Ross,

Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Paul 

M. Geier, Assistant General Counsel for Litigation and Enforcement, Paula Lee, Senior 

Trial Attorney, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, 

Washington, D.C.; Jim Mullen, Chief Counsel, Sabrina E. Redd, Attorney Advisor, 

FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D.C.; 

Sherri A. Lydon, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 
2

ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Senn Freight Lines Inc. appeals the district court’s order granting the motion to 

dismiss its civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 

12(b)(1). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we 

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Senn Freight Lines Inc. v. United 

States, No. 8:18-cv-00226-TMC (D.S.C. Dec. 18, 2018); see also Pornomo v. United 

States, 814 F.3d 681, 690 (4th Cir. 2016) (concluding district court had no jurisdiction over 

challenge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2342(3)(A) (2012)). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# L_2008353EN.01S00301.xml

| 31.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 353/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 353/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided to no longer quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
MURRAY v. UNIVERSITY OF NC AT CHAPEL HILL

124A16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 8, 2017

Laura H. McHenry, Assistant Attorney General, Kimberly D. Potter, Special Deputy Attorney General, Elizabeth A. Fisher, Assistant Solicitor General, for University of North Carolina At Chapel Hill.

Henry Clay Turner, Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill, for Murray, Jillian.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of August 2016 by Defendant for Judicial Notice:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of June 2017."
**Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 21 January 2008 – giropay v OHIM (GIROPAY)**

**(Case T-399/06)**

Community trade mark – Application for the Community word mark GIROPAY – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of goods (Council Regulation
No 40/94, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 27-28, 36-40, 43)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 October 2006 (Case R 308/2005-4) concerning an application for registration of the word mark GIROPAY as a Community trade mark. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | Giropay GmbH |
| Community trade mark sought: | Work mark GIROPAY for goods in Classes 9, 36 to 38 and 42 – Application No 2843514 |
| Decision of the Examiner’s Division: | Registration partially refused |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

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

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders giropay GmbH to pay the costs. |
STATE of North Carolina, v. David Matthew HIGGINS, Defendant.

No. COA16-404

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: February 21, 2017

NO ERROR.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document





































 



 
 

  EXHIBIT 4.3    
    

 






					
	Number

C-	 	Incorporated Under the Laws of

the State of Delaware	 	Shares

-0-
	

 	
 	
 	
 	
Cusip No.




 

  
 

  LIBERTY BROADBAND CORPORATION    
    
    Series C Common Stock, par value $.01 per share    
    
    Specimen Certificate    
    


        This Certifies that [                    ] is the owner of
[                    ] FULLY PAID AND
NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF SERIES C COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $0.01 PER SHARE, OF LIBERTY BROADBAND CORPORATION (hereinafter called the "Corporation") transferable on the books of the Corporation by the
holder hereof in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of the Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid unless countersigned by the Transfer Agent and registered by
the Registrar. 


        Witness,
the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized officers. 


Dated: 


Liberty
Broadband Corporation 


[Corporate
Seal] 

 






			
	






 President	 	





 Secretary




 

 








QuickLinks



EXHIBIT 4.3


LIBERTY BROADBAND CORPORATION Series C Common Stock, par value $.01 per share Specimen Certificate
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 27, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 56514]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19316]



[[Page 56514]]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement: 70 FR 54970, 
September 19, 2005.

Status: Closed Meeting.

Place: 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

Announcement of Additional Meeting: Additional Meeting.
    An additional Closed Meeting has been scheduled for Friday, 
September 23, 2005 at 9 a.m.
    Commissioners and certain staff members who have an interest in the 
matter will attend the Closed Meeting.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth 
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (5), (7), (9)(B), and (10) and 17 CFR 
200.402(a)(5), (7), 9(ii) and (10) permit consideration of the 
scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Atkins, as duty officer, determined that no earlier 
notice thereof was possible.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting will be: Institution and 
settlement of an injunctive action.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact:
    The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: September 22, 2005.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-19316 Filed 9-23-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
# Official Journal C 187/2016

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 187 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5926 May 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 187

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5926 May 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 187/1 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8002 — Apollo Management/Açoreana Seguros) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 187/1

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8002 — Apollo Management/Açoreana Seguros) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 187/2 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |
| 2016/C 187/3 | Notice of invitation to tender for the buying-in of skimmed milk powder by the paying agencies | 3 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2016/C 187/4 | List of competent authorities the duly authorised staff of which shall have access to enter, amend, delete or consult data in the Visa Information System (VIS) | 4 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2016/C 187/2

Euro exchange rates

2

2016/C 187/3

Notice of invitation to tender for the buying-in of skimmed milk powder by the paying agencies

3

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2016/C 187/4

List of competent authorities the duly authorised staff of which shall have access to enter, amend, delete or consult data in the Visa Information System (VIS)

4

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2016/C 187/5 | Notice of open competitions | 20 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2016/C 187/6 | Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 21 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2016/C 187/5

Notice of open competitions

20

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2016/C 187/6

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

21

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
1307.

#### Self *v.*Adel Lumber Company.

Action for damages, from city court of Nashville — Judge Peeples. June 12, 1908.

Argued October 29, 1908.

Decided March 23, 1909.

*IJendriclcs & Christian,*for plaintiff.

*Jackson & Jackson, Buie & Knight,*for defendant.

*Hill,*C. J.

1. A corporation engaged in the manufacture of lumber operated an engine and flat cars in connection with its business, for the pui'pose of hauling timber and transporting its employees to and from their places of work. *Held: (a)*The lumber company was not a carrier of passengers; and its employees, while being transported, were not passengers, (b) The relation of master and servant existed between the company and its employees while the latter were being transported to and from their places of work; and the company was charged with the duty of exercising ordinary care in furnishing eqrs and appliances in a reasonably safe condition, Moore v. *Dublin Cotton Mills,*127 *Ga.*609 (56 S. E. 839, 10 L. R. A. (N. S.) 772).

2. Where the safety of the servant is put in jeopardy by the negligence of the master, and, in attempting to escape the apparently imminent danger, the servant is injured, it is no defense to the master that the servant misjudged the danger; provided the facts were sufficient upon which to base a reasonable fear that the danger was impending. *Macon & Western R. Co.*v. *Winn,*26 *Ga.*255; *Smith v. Wrightsville R. Co.,*83 *Ga.*674 (10 S. E. 361) ; *Simmons v. East Tennessee Ry. Co.,*92 *Ga.*660 (18 S. E. 999), and cit.

3. The' allegations of negligence were proved as laid in the petition, and presented questions for the determination of the jury, and it was error to grant a nonsuit. *Adams v. Haigler,*2 *Ga. App.*103 (58 S. E. 330) ; *Corcoran*v. *Merchants & Miners Trans. Co.,*1 *Ga. App.*743 (57 S. E. 962); *Southern Bauxite Mining and Mfg. Co. v.*Fuller, 116 *Ga.*695 (43 S. E. 64). *Judgment reversed.*
Pos t Of fic e Bo x 12548

, Austin

, Texa s 7 8 7 1 1 - 2 5 4 8 • ( 5 1 2 ) 4 6 3 - 2 1 0 0 • ww w.texasattor neygeneral.gov November 16, 2015

Honorable Abel Acosta Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals P.O. Box 12308 Capitol Station Austin, TX 78711

RE: The State of Texas v. James Alan Jenkins Court of Criminal Appeals No. PD-0832- 15

Dear Mr. Acosta:

The undersigned made several citation errors in his brief filed on Monday, November 2, 2015 and would like to provide the following corrections:

 Alford v. State

, 806 S.W.2d 581 (Tex. App.

– Dallas 1991), aff’d by, 866 S.W.2d 619 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) ;

 Boykin v. State

, 818 S.W.2d 782 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) ; and,

 Kimbro v. State

, 157 Tex. Crim. 438, 249 S.W.2d 919 (Tex. Crim. App. 1952).

Yours truly,

/s/ Jon R. Meador JON R. MEADOR Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General

Enclosure

cc: George Sechrist, Attorney for Appellee Lisa McMinn, State Prosecuting Attorney PD-0832-15 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 11/16/2015 11:26:34 AM Accepted 11/16/2015 11:30:38 AM

ABEL ACOSTA CLERK
<PAGE>
 
                                EXHIBIT 21.1

                         ASCEND COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

                 SUBSIDIARIES OF ASCEND COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

                                        
(a) Ascend Foreign Sales Corporation

(b) Ascend Credit Corporation

(c) Ascend Communications Europe Limited (United Kingdom)

(d) Ascend Communications France SARL

(e) Ascend Communications Premea SARL

(f) Ascend Communications Japan KK

(g) Ascend Australia Pty. Limited (Australia)

(h) Ascend Communications GmbH (Germany)

(i) Ascend Communications (HK) Limited (Hong Kong)

(j) Ascend Communications Canada Ltd.

(k) Ascend Communications Pte. Ltd. (Singapore)

(l) Ascend Communications Benelux (Belgium)

(m) Ascend Communications Nordic AB (Sweden)

(n) Ascend Communications SRL (Italy)

(o) Ascend Communications M.E., Inc.

(p) NetStar International, Ltd.

(q) StonyBrook Services Inc.

(r) Whitetree, Inc.

(s) InterCon Systems Corporation

(t) Sahara Networks, Inc.

(u) Cascade Communications Corp.

(v) Cascade Communications Securities Corporation

(w) Cascade Communications Asia Corporation

(x) Cascade Communications HC Corporation
<PAGE>
 
(y)  Arris Networks, Inc.

(z)  Cascade Export, Inc.

(aa) Cascade Communications Limited (United Kingdom)

(ab) Cascade Communications, LTDA (Brazil)

(ac) Cascade Communications (Canada) Corp.

(ad) Cascade Communications France SARL

(ae)  Stratus Computer, Inc. ("Stratus")

(af)  Stratus Computer Limited (Ireland)