alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007056EN.01002401.xml

| 10.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 56/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/24

---

Action brought on 24 January 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-22/07)

(2007/C 56/45)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: B. Stromsky and A. Alcover San Pedro, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with Directive 2004/27/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, and in any case, by failing to communicate them the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that Directive. |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws regulations and administrative measures necessary to comply with Directive 2004/27/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 amending Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use, and in any case, by failing to communicate them the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that Directive.

1

| — | Order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for the transposition into national law of Directive 2004/27/EC expired on 30 October 2005.

---

(1)  OJ L 136, 2004, p. 34.

1

---
### §1749aaa–4. Administration

#### (a) Technical assistance

At the request of individuals or organizations operating or contemplating the operation of group practice facilities or medical practice facility (as defined in section 1749aaa–5 of this title), the Secretary may provide or obtain technical assistance in the planning for and construction of such facilities.

#### (b) Utilization of services and facilities of Federal agencies; payment; advances or reimbursement

With a view to avoiding unnecessary duplication of existing staffs and facilities of the Federal Government, the Secretary is authorized to utilize available services and facilities of any agency of the Federal Government in carrying out the provisions of this subchapter, and to pay for such services and facilities, either in advance or by way of reimbursement, in accordance with an agreement between the Secretary and the head of such agency.

(June 27, 1934, ch. 847, title XI, §1105, as added Pub. L. 89–754, title V, §502(a), Nov. 3, 1966, 80 Stat. 1276; amended Pub. L. 93–383, title III, §312(a)(5), Aug. 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 683.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1974—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 93–383 substituted "or medical practice facility (as defined in section 1749aaa–5 of this title)" for "(as defined in section 1749aaa–5(1) of this title)".
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

77-157 

August 5, 1977 

REFERENCE: 

 [*1] 4082(b). Effective Date; Special Rules. Applicability of Title IV to Plan Terminations Occurring Between July

1, 1974 and September 2, 1974 

OPINION: 

 This letter refers to your letters to Case Officer * * * regarding termination of the above Plan. 

The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (the "PBGC") has reviewed its * * * determination that the Retirement

Plan * * * 

* * * (the "Plan") terminated on * * * and that, consequently, the Plan is not subject to the PBGC's guarantee of basic

pension benefits. 

The review was based on the case file, including the information submitted by you and * * * 

We have considered your representation that an unspecified number of employees accrued benefits for holiday pay

on * * * * * * as required by a contract with the employees' union. We have also evaluated the letters from * * * to the

Plan's insurer, to the participants, and to the Department of Labor, announcing * * * as the termination date. However,

the following facts, among others, indicate that the Plan terminated on * * * Title to the * * * plant was transferred on

* * * and production ceased on that date. No employment continued thereafter. Although the union contract provided

for accrual [*2] of benefits for a number of participants after they had been terminated, these accruals, based on holiday

pay, do not extend the termination date beyond * * * 

 Under these circumstances we are precluded by section 4082(b) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act

of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1382(b) (Supp. V, 1975), from guaranteeing benefits upon the termination of the Plan. 

Matthew M. Lind 

Acting Executive Director
# C_2007056EN.01001502.xml

| 10.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 56/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/15

---

Appeal brought on 15 December 2006 by Akzo Nobel NV against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 27 September 2006 in Case T-330/01 Akzo Nobel NV v Commission

Akzo Nobel NV

Commission

(Case C-509/06 P)

(2007/C 56/27)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Appellant: Akzo Nobel NV (represented by: C. Swaak, advocaat)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of the European Communities

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

| — | Set aside the judgment delivered by the Court of First Instance (CFI) on 27 September 2006 in Case T-330/01; |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside the judgment delivered by the Court of First Instance (CFI) on 27 September 2006 in Case T-330/01;

| — | Annul Articles 3 and 4 of Commission Decision C(2001) 2931 final of 2 October 2001; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Articles 3 and 4 of Commission Decision C(2001) 2931 final of 2 October 2001;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs of the present appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs of the present appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

| (1) | The CFI appears to have erred in law in finding that liability for an infringement committed by a Community undertaking can be attributed not only to its parent companies but also — and primarily — to the head holding company which indirectly holds the shares in one of the two parent companies. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The CFI appears to have erred in law in finding that liability for an infringement committed by a Community undertaking can be attributed not only to its parent companies but also — and primarily — to the head holding company which indirectly holds the shares in one of the two parent companies.

| (2) | The CFI appears to have erred in law in forming the view that arguments which were not raised in the course of the administrative procedure before the Commission may not be invoked for the first time before the CFI. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The CFI appears to have erred in law in forming the view that arguments which were not raised in the course of the administrative procedure before the Commission may not be invoked for the first time before the CFI.

---
### Organization Expenses
# C_2006310EN.01001502.xml

| 16.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/15

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 October 2006 — Hammarplast v OHIM — Steninge Slott (STENINGE SLOTT)

(Case T-499/04) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark STENINGE SLOTT - Earlier word mark STENINGE KERAMIK - Likelihood of confusion)

(2006/C 310/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hammarplast AB (Tingsryd, Sweden) (represented by: R. Almaraz Palmero, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court of First Instance: Steninge Slott AB (Märast, Sweden) (represented by: M. Björkenfeldt, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court of First Instance:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 October 2004 (Case R 394/2003-2) concerning the opposition filed by the holder of the national trade mark STENINGE KERAMIK against registration of the Community trade mark STENINGE SLOTT.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

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

2.

Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 57 of 05.03.2005.

1

---
### [§718. Repealed. Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §110(a)(1), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 1001]

Section, added Pub. L. 87–651, title II, §205(a), Sept. 7, 1962, 76 Stat. 519, provided that officers of the armed forces could be detailed for duty as assistants or personal aides to the Secretary of Defense.
•;.• 

dismissal for failure to state a claim, accepting all of the factual 

allegations in the complaint as true and drawing all inferences in favor of 

the plaintiff). 

As we explained in State Board of Parole Commissioners v. 

Morrow, 127 Nev. „ 255 P.3d 224, 230 (2011), no constitutional due 

process protections apply during parole hearings because inmates do not 

have a liberty interest in being paroled. 1And as appellant has not 

identified any liberty interest at stake in a Psychological Review Panel 

hearing, he has not demonstrated a right to constitutional due process in 

such hearings. Cf. id. at , 255 P.3d at 228-29 (recognizing that the 

Psychological Review Panel does not afford certain due process protections 

in its hearings). Further, the Psychological Review Panel was not 

required to provide appellant with a copy of the considered documents 

under Nevada's open meeting law because those documents were 

designated confidential. See NRS 241.020(5)(c) (explaining that a public 

body does not have to provide copies of supporting material to the public if 

those materials are confidential); NDOC AR 813 (1.8.1) (July 23, 2009) 

(designating all documents considered by the panel confidential pursuant 

to NRS 213.1075). Finally, while appellant argues that the Psychological 

Review Panel respondents had a statutory duty under NRS 179A.100(7)(b) 

to provide him with a copy of his file because it is a record of criminal 

'As in Morrow, no statutory due process protections applied during 

appellant's parole hearing because appellant's parole hearing took place 

on June 3, 2009, during the Legislature's temporary suspension of the 

statute's due process protections. See Morrow, 127 Nev. at , 255 P.3d 

at 227 (describing when Nevada's statutory due process protections were 

ineffective); see also American Civil Liberties Union of Nev. v. Cortez 

Masto, 719 F. Supp. 2d 1258, 1260 (D. Nev. 2008). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2 
history, he did not allege that he had complied with NRS 179A.100(7)(b) 

by requesting a copy of that file. 2 See NRS 179A.100(7)(b) (providing that 

a record of criminal history "must be disseminated by an agency of 

criminal justice, upon request, to . . . Nile person who is the subject of the 

record of criminal history. . .") (emphasis added). Thus, the district court 

properly concluded that appellant failed to state a claim for the violation 

of his due process rights. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 3 

, J. 

Hardesty 

Parraguirre 

ChRA 

Cherry 

cc: Hon. Richard Wagner, District Judge 

Michael McCormick 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Pershing County Clerk 

2Because appellant failed to allege that he had requested a copy of 

his file, as required under NRS 179A.100(7)(b), we need not address 

whether the Psychological Review Panel is an "agency of criminal justice" 

or whether an inmate's parole file is a "record of criminal history." 

3In light of this order, we need not consider appellant's arguments 

regarding respondents' qualified and absolute immunity. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

4)5 ' 

3
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001062195

<NAME>                        24/7 MEDIA, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                   U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                  MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                         1
<CASH>                                         21,302,000
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  11,324,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                      224,000
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               33,855,000
<PP&E>                                          6,199,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                  1,751,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 60,445,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          12,453,000
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                          173,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     47,732,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   60,445,000
<SALES>                                        11,450,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               11,450,000
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   8,796,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               10,186,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 23,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,244,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,244,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,244,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (0.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.42)
        
                                

</TABLE>
#### § 100.146 Legal or accounting services to other political committees.

Legal or accounting services rendered to or on behalf of an authorized committee of a candidate or any other political committee are not expenditures if the person paying for such services is the regular employer of the individual rendering such services and if the services are solely to ensure compliance with the Act or 26 U.S.C. 9001 *et seq.* and 9032 *et seq.* For purposes of this section, a partnership shall be deemed to be the regular employer of a partner. Amounts paid by the regular employer for these services shall be reported by the committee receiving such services in accordance with 11 CFR 104.3(h). Expenditures for these services by a candidate certified to receive Primary Matching Funds under 11 CFR part 9034 do not count against such candidate's expenditure limitations under 11 CFR part 9035 or 11 CFR 110.8. Unless paid for with federal funds received pursuant to 11 CFR part 9005, disbursements for these services by a candidate who is certified to receive payments from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund under 11 CFR part 9005 do not count against that candidate's expenditure limitations under 11 CFR 110.8.
# C_2007047EN.01000301.xml

| 1.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 47/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 47/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4558 — Alpha Private Equity Funds/Non Ferrous International Group)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2007/C 47/04)

On 22 February 2007, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4558. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32007M4558. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://eur-lex.europa.eu)

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 12-1

                          CENTERPOINT PROPERTIES TRUST
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                             (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                           -----------------------
                                                  1997        1996         1995         1994         1993
                                                  ----        ----         ----         ----         ----
<S>                                             <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>          <C>
Available earnings:
     Net income (loss)                          $27,260      $14,941      $ 8,212      $ 2,359      ($4,930)
     Add interest expense (1)                    10,871       10,992       12,985       12,157        4,111
                                                -------      -------      -------      -------      -------
Available earnings (loss) (2)                   $38,131      $25,933      $21,197      $14,516      ($  819)
                                                =======      =======      =======      =======      =======
Fixed Charges:
     Interest expense                           $10,871      $10,992      $12,985      $12,157      $ 4,111
     Capitalized interest                           893          142           20           63          470
                                                -------      -------      -------      -------      -------
Total Fixed Charges                             $11,764      $11,134      $13,005      $12,220      $ 4,581
                                                =======      =======      =======      =======      =======

Ratio of earnings to Fixed Charges (3)             3.24         2.33         1.63         1.19
                                                =======      =======      =======      =======
</TABLE>
------------------------------------
NOTES:
(1)  Interest expense includes amortization of debt expense.
(2)  Interest portion of rental expense is not calculated because annual
     rental expense for the Company is not significant.
(3)  The ratio of earnings to fixed charges for the year ended December 31,
     1993 was less than one to one. The approximate dollar amount necessary
     to cover the deficiency in that period was $5,400.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 575 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 575

                 Supporting Internet safety awareness.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 12, 2000

   Mr. Goode (for himself and Mr. Goodlatte) submitted the following 
      resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
                 Supporting Internet safety awareness.

Whereas the Internet provides citizens of the United States with the technology 
        for research, education, entertainment, and communication;
Whereas millions of Americans, many school libraries and classrooms, and many 
        public libraries are connected to the Internet;
Whereas more than 1 out of 5 missing 15- to 17-year-old teenagers have 
        disappeared because of someone they met while chatting on the Internet;
Whereas there are an estimated 10,000 Internet websites designed for or by 
        individuals who have a sexual preference for children;
Whereas there are an estimated 200 million pages of pornography, hate, violence, 
        and abuse on the Internet;
Whereas there are multitudes of strangers who use the Internet to enter homes, 
        talk to and ``groom'' children, and will take indecent advantages of 
        those children if given a chance;
Whereas children have been raped, assaulted, kidnapped, and deprived of their 
        innocence by individuals they met on the Internet; and
Whereas September 2000 is Internet Safety Awareness Month: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) urges the citizens of the United States to recognize 
        and support educational programs that make surfing on the 
        Internet safe and fun;
            (2) supports initiatives to educate parents, children, 
        educators, and community leaders about the enormous 
        possibilities and the potential dangers of the Internet; and
            (3) urges all Americans to become informed about the 
        Internet and to support proactive efforts that will provide 
        Internet safety for children and for future generations to 
        come.
                                 <all>
```
### §245. Vacancies during recess of Senate

The President shall have power to fill all vacancies that may happen on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System during the recess of the Senate by granting commissions which shall expire with the next session of the Senate.

(Dec. 23, 1913, ch. 6, §10 (par.), 38 Stat. 260; June 3, 1922, ch. 205, 42 Stat. 620; Aug. 23, 1935, ch. 614, title II, §203(a), 49, Stat. 704.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section is comprised of fifth par. of section 10 of act Dec. 23, 1913. For classification to this title of other pars. of section 10, see Codification note set out under section 241 of this title.

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

#### Change of Name

Section 203(a) of act Aug. 23, 1935, changed name of Federal Reserve Board to Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.