alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2006178EN.01000701.xml

| 29.7.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 178/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/7

---

Judgement of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 June 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret — Denmark) — De Danske Bilimportører v Skatteministeriet

(Case C-98/05) (1)

1

(Sixth VAT Directive - Article 11(A)(2)(a) and (3)(c) - Taxable amount - Registration duty on new motor vehicles)

(2006/C 178/10)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Østre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: De Danske Bilimportører

Applicant:

Defendant: Skatteministeriet

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Østre Landsret — Interpretation of Article 11(A)(2)(a) and (3)(c) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145 p. 1) — Inclusion in the taxable amount relating to the sale of a new motor vehicle of a tax payable on registration of the vehicle

Operative part of the judgement

In the context of a contract of sale providing that, in accordance with the buyer's intended use of the vehicle, the dealer will supply it registered and for a price which includes the registration duty on new motor vehicles he paid before supplying the vehicle, that duty, for which the occurrence triggering liability is not the supply of the vehicle but its first registration in national territory, is not covered by the concept of taxes, duties, levies and charges within the meaning of Article 11(A)(2)(a) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment. Such a duty corresponds to an amount received by the taxable person from the purchaser of the vehicle as repayment for expenses paid out in the name and for the account of the latter within the meaning of Article 11(A)(3)(c).

---

(1)  OJ C 106, 20.4.2005.

1

---
Exhibit 99.1




Annual Servicer’s Certificate


Provided by Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation


to Holders of Notes and Certificates









NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION




OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE




The undersigned, Michael J. McConnell, Vice President of NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, a California corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, in his capacity as such corporate officer, as follows:




(1)           The undersigned has caused a review, under his supervision, to be made of i) the activities; and ii) the performance under the Agreement (as defined below), of the Company during the 12-month period ended March 31, 2014 (the “Reporting Period”); and




(2)           To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, based upon such review, the Company has fulfilled its obligations in all material respects under the Agreement throughout the Reporting Period.




This Officer’s Certificate is being furnished pursuant to Section 4.09(a) of that certain Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of February 22, 2012 (the “Agreement”), by and among the Company, in its individual capacity and as servicer, Nissan Auto Receivables Corporation II, as seller, and Nissan Auto Receivables 2012-A Owner Trust.




Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand effective as of the 16th day of June, 2014.




/s/Michael J. McConnell________________


Michael J. McConnell


Vice President
# C_2013309EN.01000101.xml

| 24.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/1

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty)

2013/C 309/01

| Date of adoption of the decision | 20.9.2013 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | SA.36625 (13/N) |
| Member State | United Kingdom |
| Region | Scotland | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | QMS Meat Quality Advertising Scheme |
| Legal basis | | Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 |

Date of adoption of the decision

20.9.2013

Reference number of State Aid

SA.36625 (13/N)

Member State

United Kingdom

Region

Scotland

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

QMS Meat Quality Advertising Scheme

Legal basis

Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006

| | The Quality Meat Scotland Order 2008 |
| --- | --- |

The Quality Meat Scotland Order 2008

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Advertising (AGRI)

Form of aid

Other — Provision of services on preferential terms

Budget

Overall budget: GBP 8 million

Intensity

100 %

Duration (period)

1.4.2014-31.3.2017

Economic sectors

Agriculture, forestry and fishing

Name and address of the granting authority

| Quality Meat Scotland |
| --- |
| The Rural Centre |
| Ingliston |
| Midlothian |
| EH28 8NZ |
| UNITED KINGDOM |

Quality Meat Scotland

The Rural Centre

Ingliston

Midlothian

EH28 8NZ

UNITED KINGDOM

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---
#### § 117.34 Financial status of Indians confidential.

The financial status of Indians shall be regarded as confidential and shall not be disclosed except to the owner of the account or his authorized agent, unless authorized in advance by the Commissioner.
### **CHAPTER 1219—STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR RETENTION AND PROMOTION**

Sec.
12641.
Standards and procedures: Secretary to prescribe.
12642.
Standards and qualifications: result of failure to comply with.
12643.
Boards for appointment, promotion, and certain other purposes: composition.
12644.
Members physically not qualified for active duty: discharge or transfer to retired status.
12645.
Commissioned officers: retention until completion of required service.
12646.
Commissioned officers: retention of after completing 18 or more, but less than 20, years of service.
12647.
Commissioned officers: retention in active status while assigned to Selective Service System or serving as United States property and fiscal officers.
§ 166.702 Can a permit provide for negotiated remedies in the event of a permit violation? ( a ) A permit of tribal land may provide the tribe with certain negotiated remedies in the event of a permit violation, including the power to terminate the permit. A permit of individually-owned Indian land may provide the individual Indian landowners with similar remedies, so long as the permit also specifies the manner in which those remedies may be exercised by or on behalf of the Indian landowners. Any notice of violation must be provided by written notice.
( b ) The negotiated remedies described in paragraph (a) of this section will apply in addition to the cancellation remedy available to us under § 166.705(c) of this subpart. If the permit specifically authorizes us to exercise any negotiated remedies on behalf of the Indian landowners, the exercise of such remedies may substitute for cancellation.
( c ) A permit may provide for permit disputes to be resolved in tribal court or any other court of competent jurisdiction, or through arbitration or some other alternative dispute resolution method. We may not be bound by decisions made in such forums, but we will defer to any ongoing proceedings, as appropriate, in deciding whether to exercise any of the remedies available to us under § 166.705 of this subpart.
§ 225.24 Environmental studies. ( a ) The Secretary shall ensure that all environmental studies are prepared as required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) found at 40 CFR parts 1500-1508.
( b ) The Secretary shall ensure that all necessary surveys are performed and clearances obtained in accordance with 36 CFR parts 60, 63, and 800 and with the requirements of the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 469 *et seq.*), the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 *et seq.*), the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (42 U.S.C. 1996), and Executive Order 11593 (3 CFR 1971-1975 Comp., p. 559, May 13, 1971). If these surveys indicate that a mineral development will have an adverse effect on a property listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the Secretary shall: ( 1 ) Seek the comments of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, in accordance with 36 CFR part 800;
( 2 ) Ensure that the property is avoided, that the adverse effect is mitigated, or that appropriate excavations or other related research is conducted; and
( 3 ) Ensure that complete data describing the historic property is preserved.
### §703. Reenlistment leave

(a) Leave for not more than 90 days may be authorized, in the discretion of the Secretary concerned, or his designated representative, to a member of an armed force who reenlists. Leave authorized under this section shall be deducted from leave accrued during active service before reenlistment or charged against leave that may accrue during future active service, or both.

(b) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, and notwithstanding subsection (a), a member who is on active duty in an area described in section 310(a)(2) or paragraph (1) or (3) of section 351(a) of title 37 and who, by reenlistment, extension of enlistment, or other voluntary action, extends his required tour of duty in that area for at least six months may be—

(1) authorized not more than thirty days of leave, exclusive of travel time, at an authorized place selected by the member; and

(2) transported at the expense of the United States to and from that place.

Leave under this subsection may not be charged or credited to leave that accrued or that may accrue under section 701 of this title. The provisions of this subsection shall be effective only in the case of members who extend their required tours of duty on or before June 30, 1973.

(Added Pub. L. 87–649, §3(1), Sept. 7, 1962, 76 Stat. 493; amended Pub. L. 89–735, Nov. 2, 1966, 80 Stat. 1163; Pub. L. 90–330, June 5, 1968, 82 Stat. 170; Pub. L. 91–302, July 2, 1970, 84 Stat. 368; Pub. L. 92–481, Oct. 9, 1972, 86 Stat. 795; Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VI, §618(c), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1426.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 703 | 37:31a(a) (4th and 7th sentences). | Aug. 9, 1946, ch. 931, §3(a) (4th and 7th sentences), 60 Stat. 963. |
| | 37:32(f) (last 8 words) | Aug. 9, 1946, ch. 931, §2(f) (last 8 words), 60 Stat. 963. |

The 4th sentence of section 31a(a) of existing title 37 is omitted as executed. The words ", or his designated representative," are substituted for the last 8 words of section 32(f) of existing title 37.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2017—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 115–91 inserted "or paragraph (1) or (3) of section 351(a)" after "section 310(a)(2)" in introductory provisions.

1972—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 92–481 substituted "June 30, 1973" for "June 30, 1972".

1970—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 91–302 substituted "June 30, 1972" for "June 30, 1970".

1968—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 90–330 substituted "June 30, 1970" for "June 30, 1968".

1966—Pub. L. 89–735 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and added subsec. (b).

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective Nov. 1, 1962, see section 15 of Pub. L. 87–649, set out as a note preceding section 101 of Title 37, Pay and Allowances of the Uniformed Services.
### §8061. Department of the Navy: composition

The Department of the Navy is composed of the following:

(1) The Office of the Secretary of the Navy.

(2) The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations.

(3) The Headquarters, Marine Corps.

(4) The entire operating forces, including naval aviation, of the Navy and of the Marine Corps, and the reserve components of those operating forces.

(5) All field activities, headquarters, forces, bases, installations, activities, and functions under the control or supervision of the Secretary of the Navy.

(6) The Coast Guard when it is operating as a service in the Navy.

(Added Pub. L. 99–433, title V, §511(b)(1), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1043, §5061; renumbered §8061, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §807(a)(1), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1834.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 5011 of this title prior to enactment of Pub. L. 99–433.

A prior section 8061 was renumbered section 9061 of this title.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 5061 of this title as this section.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 376 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     November 18, 1999.
Whereas approximately 80,000 infants, children, teenagers, and young adults of 
        families living throughout the United States die each year from myriad 
        causes;
Whereas the death of an infant, child, teenager, or young adult of a family is 
        considered to be one of the greatest tragedies that a parent or family 
        will ever endure during a lifetime; and
Whereas a supportive environment and empathy and understanding are considered 
        critical factors in the healing process of a family that is coping with 
        and recovering from the loss of a loved one: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports the goals and ideas of 
``National Children's Memorial Day'' in remembrance of the many infants, 
children, teenagers, and young adults of families in the United States who have 
died.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
MICHAEL STEVE COX,

Petitioner, vs. THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WHITE PINE, Respondent. MICHAEL STEVE COX, Petitioner, vs. THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WHITE PINE, Respondent. No. 62079

No. 62080



### ORDER DENYING WRIT PETITIONS These are seven original proper person petitions for extraordinary relief. The petitions are not consolidated.

Having considered these petitions and supporting documents, we conclude that petitioner's arguments lack merit and that our intervention by way of extraordinary relief is not warranted. Accordingly, we deny the petitions. NRAP 21(b)(1); NRAP 21(c).

Additionally, as demonstrated by the this order, petitioner has filed numerous meritless proper person petitions in this court seeking extraordinary writ relief and has further filed a number of similarly meritless appeals in this court. 

### See Cox v. McDaniel, Docket No. 60056, 

### Cox v. McDaniel, Docket No. 60151, 

### Cox v. Bannister, Docket No. 60637, 

### Cox v. State, Docket No. 61322. We caution appellant that continued filing of such meritless petitions and appeals may result in restrictions on his ability to file papers in this court in forma pauperis. 

### See Jordan v. State, Dept. of Motor Vehicles & Pub. Safety, 121 Nev. 44, 110 P.3d 30 (2005),

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A 2J.



### abrogated on other grounds by Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of N. Las Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 181 F'.3d 670 (2008).

It is so ORDERED.'

Hardesty



### c-c -Sis° 7- Parr a guirre

cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge Michael Steve Cox Attorney General/Carson City Carson City Clerk White Pine County Clerk Eighth District Court Clerk

"In each of these writ petitions, this court has received petitioner's requests for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We direct the clerk of this court to file the May 17, 2011, and the June 28, 2011, motions in Docket No. 58292; the March 19, 2012, motion in Docket No. 60404; the March 19, 2012, motion in Docket No. 60406; the March 19, 2012, motion in Docket No. 60407; the March 19, 2012, motion in Docket No. 60409; the November 20, 2012, motion in Docket No. 62079; and the November 20, 2012, motion in Docket No. 62080. Because petitioner was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in each of these writ petitions, no action is required on these motions.
# C_2006212EN.01002901.xml

| 2.9.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 212/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 212/29

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 4 July 2006 — easyJet Airline v Commission

(Case T-177/04) (1)

1

(Competition - Concentrations - Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 - Decision declaring a concentration compatible with the common market - Action brought by a third party - Admissibility - Air transport market - Commitments)

(2006/C 212/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: easyJet Airline Co. Ltd (Luton, United Kingdom) (represented by: initially by J. Cook, J. Parker and S. Dolan, Solicitors, and subsequently by M. Werner and M. Waha, avocats, L. Mills, Solicitor, M. de Lasala Lobera and R. Malhotra, avocats)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: P. Oliver, A. Bouquet and A. Whelan, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues, Agent)

Intervener in support of the defendant

Re:

Annulment of the Commission Decision of 11 February 2004 declaring compatible with the common market the concentration between Air France and KLM (Case No COMP/M.3280 — Air France/KLM) (OJ 2004 C 60, p. 5), whereby Air France was to acquire full control of KML

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders the applicant to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the applicant to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Commission.

| 3. | Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the French Republic to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 201, 7.8.2004.

1

---
EX-35.5
(logo) WELLS FARGO

Corporate Trust Services

MAC R1204-010
9062 Old Annapolis Road
Columbia, MD 21045

Tel: 410 884 2000
Fax: 410 715 2380


Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.
1585 Broadway
New York, New York 10036


RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc.
Commercial Mortgage Pass-through Certificates Series 2012-C4


Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 1, 2012 (the
"Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank,
N.A., as Custodian ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for
the year ending December 31, 2013 (the "Reporting Period"):


(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its
    performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's
    supervision; and

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo
    has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material
    respects throughout the Reporting Period.


March 27, 2014


/s/ Gail Vannest
GAIL VANNEST
Vice President


Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 286

Recognizing that prevention of youth suicide is a compelling national priority.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 9, 1999

Mr. PACKARD (for himself and Mr. UDALL of Colorado) submitted the

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce

RESOLUTION

Recognizing that prevention of youth suicide is a compelling

national priority.

Whereas youth suicide is one of the most disruptive and tragic events a family and a community can experience, and

it occurs at a national rate of over 5,000 youth suicides

annually;

Whereas suicide is the fastest growing cause of death among

youths;

Whereas suicide kills youths three to six times more often

than homicide;

Whereas research shows that 95 percent of all youth suicides

are preventable;

Whereas research shows that the prevention of youth suicide

must be recognized as a national priority;
2

•HRES 286 IH

Whereas community awareness and education will encourage

the development of strategies to prevent youth suicide;

Whereas the yellow ribbon is rapidly becoming recognized

internationally as the symbol for the awareness and prevention of youth suicide, and it is recognized and used by

suicide prevention groups, crisis centers, schools, churches, youth centers, hospitals, counselors, teachers, parents,

and especially youths themselves; and

Whereas September 19 to 25, 1999, should be recognized as

Yellow Ribbon Youth Suicide Awareness and Prevention

Week: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

2 (1) recognizes that the need to increase awareness

3 about and prevent youth suicide is a compelling national

4 priority; and

5 (2) encourages Americans, communities, and the Na6 tion to work to increase awareness about and prevent

7 youth suicide.

Æ
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-22-00246-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2022-000502-1

Before Kerr, Birdwell, and Bassel, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

REBECCA LITTLE, Appellant

V.

AVA CHESSER, Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

On September 22, 2022, we notified appellant that her brief had not been filed 

as the appellate rules require. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). We stated that we could 

dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution unless, within ten days, appellant filed with 

the court an appellant’s brief and an accompanying motion reasonably explaining the 

brief’s untimely filing and why an extension was needed. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b), 

38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). We have received no response.

Because appellant has failed to file a brief even after we afforded an 

opportunity to explain the initial failure, we dismiss the appeal for want of 

prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), 43.2(f).

Per Curiam

Delivered: November 17, 2022