alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2006294EN.01005301.xml

| 2.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 294/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/53

---

Appeal brought on 18 September 2006 by the Commission against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 12 July 2006 in Case F-18/05, D v Commission

(Case T-262/06 P)

(2006/C 294/109)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: Commission of the European Communities

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: 'D'

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought by the appellant

| — | annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 12 July 2006 in Case F-18/05, D v Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 12 July 2006 in Case F-18/05, D v Commission;

D

Commission

| — | refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal for it to rule on the other pleas; |
| --- | --- |

—

refer the case back to the Civil Service Tribunal for it to rule on the other pleas;

| — | make an appropriate order as to the costs of the appeal, alternatively, reserve the costs for appraisal by the Civil Service Tribunal. |
| --- | --- |

—

make an appropriate order as to the costs of the appeal, alternatively, reserve the costs for appraisal by the Civil Service Tribunal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By judgment of 12 July 2006, the annulment of which is sought in this appeal, the Civil Service Tribunal set aside the Commission's decision of 4 May 2004 turning down the request for recognition that the disease from which the applicant is suffering is occupational in origin and ordered the Commission to pay all of the costs.

In support of its application for annulment of that judgment, the Commission submits a plea alleging infringement of Community law, in particular Article 48(2) of the Rules of Procedure, in that the Tribunal treated as admissible an argument concerning the infringement of res judicata which, according to the Commission, was put forward by the applicant for the first time in the reply at first instance. Furthermore, the Commission submits that the Tribunal erred in law and/or misinterpreted the matters of law put forward by the parties, in particular by the Commission itself. As regards the assessment of the substantive arguments, the Commission maintains that the Tribunal infringed Community law, in particular Article 73 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities and the rules relating thereto, misconstrued the scope of the judgment in Case T-376/02 (1) and failed to meet its obligation to state reasons. It also submits that the Tribunal undermined the principle of legal certainty.

res judicata

1

---

(1)  Case T-376/02 O v Commission [2004] ECR-SC I-A-349 and II-1595.

1

O

Commission

---
#### § 301.1 Eligibility for use of Government stamp.

Subject to the detailed requirements that follow, the Government stamp shall be affixed only to work individually produced and to work entirely hand-made. No object produced under conditions resembling a bench work system, and no object in whose manufacture any power-driven machinery has been used, shall be eligible for the use of the Government stamp.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF JULY 3, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-03-1999
<CASH>                                           1,946
<SECURITIES>                                       319
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,618
<ALLOWANCES>                                       215
<INVENTORY>                                     15,586
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                82,114
<PP&E>                                         117,523
<DEPRECIATION>                                  43,959
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 214,584
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           65,064
<BONDS>                                        120,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,250
<OTHER-SE>                                    (11,586)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   214,584
<SALES>                                        149,743
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               149,743
<CGS>                                          132,932
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  144,499
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (32)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,985
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,710)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,825
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,535)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,535)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### § 213.8 Filing of lease deemed constructive notice.

The filing of any lease in the office of the Area Director shall be deemed constructive notice of the existence of such lease. See act of March 1, 1907.

(34 Stat. 1026)
(reviewing a district court's sentencing decision for abuse of discretion);

Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 1161 (1976) (observing that we will not interfere with the sentence imposed "[s]o long as the record does not demonstrate prejudice resulting from consideration of information or accusations founded on facts supported only by impalpable or highly suspect evidence").

Having concluded that Barnes is not entitled to relief, we ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED.

0eA.419%, ‘ Hardesty ,J.

cc: Hon. Jerome T. Tao, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA

(0) I947A 2
EXHIBIT 32

Section 906 Certification

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc., the
sole general partner of Host Hotels & Resorts, L.P., (the Company) hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that:

(i) the
accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended September 7, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Dated: October 17, 2007



/s/ Christopher J. NassettaChristopher J. NassettaChief Executive Officer of Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.




/s/ W. Edward WalterW. Edward WalterChief Financial Officer of Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc.


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of
any general incorporation language in such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Editorial Note on Part 23
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 23 appear at 79 FR 27190, May 13, 2014.

§ 23.112 What time limits and extensions apply? ( a ) No foster-care-placement or termination-of-parental-rights proceeding may be held until at least 10 days after receipt of the notice by the parent (or Indian custodian) and by the Tribe (or the Secretary). The parent, Indian custodian, and Tribe each have a right, upon request, to be granted up to 20 additional days from the date upon which notice was received to prepare for participation in the proceeding.
( b ) Except as provided in 25 U.S.C. 1922 and § 23.113, no child-custody proceeding for foster-care placement or termination of parental rights may be held until the waiting periods to which the parents or Indian custodians and to which the Indian child's Tribe are entitled have expired, as follows: ( 1 ) 10 days after each parent or Indian custodian (or Secretary where the parent or Indian custodian is unknown to the petitioner) has received notice of that particular child-custody proceeding in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 1912(a) and § 23.111;
( 2 ) 10 days after the Indian child's Tribe (or the Secretary if the Indian child's Tribe is unknown to the party seeking placement) has received notice of that particular child-custody proceeding in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 1912(a) and § 23.111;
( 3 ) Up to 30 days after the parent or Indian custodian has received notice of that particular child-custody proceeding in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 1912(a) and § 23.111, if the parent or Indian custodian has requested up to 20 additional days to prepare for the child-custody proceeding as provided in 25 U.S.C. 1912(a) and § 23.111; and
( 4 ) Up to 30 days after the Indian child's Tribe has received notice of that particular child-custody proceeding in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 1912(a) and § 23.111, if the Indian child's Tribe has requested up to 20 additional days to prepare for the child-custody proceeding.
( c ) Additional time beyond the minimum required by 25 U.S.C. 1912 and § 23.111 may also be available under State law or pursuant to extensions granted by the court.
Exhibit 13.1



Certification of the Principal 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
the annual report of Eros International Plc (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2015, as
amended by Amendment No. 1 on Form 20-F/A, accompanying this Certification, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof, (the “Report”), I, Jyoti Deshpande, Group Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | I am the Group Chief Executive Officer of the Company;
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (3) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: August 20, 2015



/s/ Jyoti Deshpande

Name:  Jyoti Deshpande

Title:    Group Chief Executive Officer
# C_2006294EN.01006602.xml

| 2.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 294/66 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/66

---

Action brought on 26 September 2006 — Buckingham and Others v Commission

(Case F-116/06)

(2006/C 294/131)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Anne Buckingham (Brussels, Belgium) and Others (represented by: N. Lhoëst, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the decision adopted by the Commission on 23 November 2005, published in Administrative Notices No 85-2005, in that it did not allocate any priority points to the applicants, officials in grade A*12, recognising the work carried out in the interests of the institution for 2004; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision adopted by the Commission on 23 November 2005, published in Administrative Notices No 85-2005, in that it did not allocate any priority points to the applicants, officials in grade A*12, recognising the work carried out in the interests of the institution for 2004;

| — | in so far as necessary, annul the express decisions of the Commission rejecting the complaints made by the applicants pursuant to Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- |

—

in so far as necessary, annul the express decisions of the Commission rejecting the complaints made by the applicants pursuant to Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The action is based on infringement of Articles 9 and 13 of the General Provisions for Implementing Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and, as a subsidiary plea, on the unlawfulness of the said provisions in that they result in discrimination and infringe Article 5(5) of the Staff Regulations.

---
§ 291.7 What must the Secretary do if it has been determined that the Indian tribe is eligible to request Class III gaming procedures? ( a ) If the Secretary determines that the Indian tribe is eligible to request Class III gaming procedures and that the Indian tribe's proposal is complete, the Secretary must submit the Indian tribe's proposal to the Governor and the Attorney General of the State where the gaming is proposed.
( b ) The Governor and Attorney General will have 60 days to comment on: ( 1 ) Whether the State is in agreement with the Indian tribe's proposal;
( 2 ) Whether the proposal is consistent with relevant provisions of the laws of the State;
( 3 ) Whether contemplated gaming activities are permitted in the State for any purposes, by any person, organization, or entity.
( c ) The Secretary will also invite the State's Governor and Attorney General to submit an alternative proposal to the Indian tribe's proposed Class III gaming procedures.
### [§2410m. Renumbered §3863]
Regular Totals (Operators)

Airport = EWR

Operator = 0001(Exclude)

Status Date = 07/01/2012 (History & Current)

02/23/2015 07:48:51

Query Parameters:
02/23/2015 07:48:51

Carrier

Regular Totals (Operators)

Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded Excludes FAA Held PF7 Status Date = 07/01/2012 (History & Current)

EWR

AAL AMERICAN AIRLINES 21 

ACA AIR CANADA 16

ASA ALASKA AIRLINES 4

AVI L'AVION/OPENSKIES 4

AZA ALITALIA 2

BAW BRITISH AIRWAYS 6 

CAA ATLANTIC SOUTHEAST AIRLINES (code 6

CKS KALITTA FLYING SERVICES (AMERICAN INT'L 2

COM COMAIR AIRLINES 4

CPA CATHAY PACIFIC 1

CPZ COMPASS AIRLINES 4

CSQ IBC AIRWAYS 2

DAL DELTA AIR LINES 33 

DLH DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA 8

EGF AMR EAGLE HOLDING COPR. (FORMERLY 15

ELY EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINES 1

FDX FED EX 8

FLG ENDEAVOR AIR (dba NORTHWEST AIRLINK 9

JAI JET AIRWAYS 2

JBU JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORP. 34 

JZA AIR CANADA JAZZ 6

LOT LOT - POLISH AIRLINES 1

PDT PIEDMONT AIRLINES, INC. (FORMERLY 10

POE PORTER AIRLINES 26

RPA REPUBLIC AIRLINE 4

SAS SCANDINAVIAN AIRLINES 7

SIA SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED 1

SWA SOUTHWEST AIRLINES 34

SWR SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES (SWISSAIR 2

TAP TAP-AIR PORTUGAL 2

UAL UNITED AIRLINES 910

UPS UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 2

USA US AIRWAYS 23

VIR VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIR 3

WJA WESTJET 2

Page 2
# C_2006261EN.01001503.xml

| 28.10.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/15

---

Action brought on 8 September 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-370/06)

(2006/C 261/28)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

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

Applicant:

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/24/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions or, in any case, by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2001/24/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the reorganisation and winding up of credit institutions or, in any case, by failing to communicate them to the Commission, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| — | an order that the Portuguese Republic should pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

an order that the Portuguese Republic should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period allowed for transposition of the directive into domestic law expired on 5 May 2004.

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 125, p. 15

1

---
**Exhibit 32**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Hudson Respiratory Care Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Periodic Report”), I, Charles A. French, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to my knowledge, that:

|  | 1. | The Periodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | 2. | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   |   |   |                                                                         |
|--------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|        |   |   | /s/ CHARLES FRENCH                                                           |
|   |   |   |                                                                              |
|   |   |   | **Charles A. French****Chief Executive Officer and President**August 8, 2003 |
SERVED: FEBRUARY 11, 2014 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OFHEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF DAVID ALLEN DRAVES FAA DOCKETNO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] (Civil Penalty Action) FDMS NO. FAA- 2013-0855

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2012-GL-25-0058) has been assigned to Administrative LawJudge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served onthe Judge, the FAAHearing Docket, and the otherpersons onthe attached Service List.

Attachment

- Service List 

# --**\Z.k~** '--·-·**·-·~-·** ./' Ronnie A. Yoder
.· ;/ ChiefAdministrative LawJu<fuge 

# /

### SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & 

### ONE COPY Federal AviationAdministration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 1 

### David A. Draves, Respondent 

### 1878 Tallmadge Road Kent, OH 44240 TEL: NOT PROVIDED FAX: NOT PROVIDED David A. Draves, Respondent 

### 1780 Foust Road Xenia, OH 45385 TEL: NOT PROVIDED FAX: NOT PROVIDED Kate Barber, Complainant's Counsel 

### Office ofRegional Counsel Great Lakes Region, AGL-7 Federal Aviation Administration 2300 East Devon Avenue Des Plaines, IL 60018 TEL: 847-294-7862 FAX: 847-294-7498 

### ONE COPY

Hon. J.E. Sullivan,Administrative LawJudge 

### Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation

. 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310)

Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366'-2132 FAX: 202-366-7536 FDMS No. FAA-2013-0855 (Civil PenaltyAction)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### -2-
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 38 (Friday, February 25, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 10598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4290]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology; Recommendations Received From the HIT Policy Committee

AGENCY: Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology (ONC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Section 3002(e) of the Public Health Service Act, as amended 
by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health 
(HITECH) Act, requires the National Coordinator for Health Information 
Technology to publish in the Federal Register and post on the internet 
all policy recommendations made by the HIT Policy Committee.
    Policy recommendations presented at the February 2, 2011 HIT Policy 
Committee meeting have been transmitted from the HIT Policy Committee 
to the National Coordinator and are available on the ONC Web site: 
http://healthit.hhs.gov/portal/server.pt/community/healthit_hhs_gov__policy_recommendations/1815.

    Dated: February 14, 2011.
Judith Sparrow,
Office of Programs and Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator 
for Health Information Technology.
[FR Doc. 2011-4290 Filed 2-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-45-P