alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2006326EN.01007102.xml

| 30.12.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/71 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/71

---

Action brought on 27 November 2006 — Moreira da Fonseca v OHIM — General Óptica (GENERAL OPTICA)

(Case T-321/06)

(2006/C 326/148)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Alberto Jorge Moreira da Fonseca Lda (Santo Tirso, Portugal) (represented by: M. Oehen Mendes, lawyer)

Applicant:

da

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: General Óptica SA (Barcelona, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 August 2006 notified to the applicant 27 September 2006, in cancellation proceedings No 830C (Case No R 945/2005-1) and consequently declare Community trade mark No 573 774‘GENERAL OPTICA’ filed on 10 July 1997 and registered on 10 September 1999, as invalid, or in the alternative, revoked; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 8 August 2006 notified to the applicant 27 September 2006, in cancellation proceedings No 830C (Case No R 945/2005-1) and consequently declare Community trade mark No 573 774‘GENERAL OPTICA’ filed on 10 July 1997 and registered on 10 September 1999, as invalid, or in the alternative, revoked;

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a declaration of invalidity: The figurative mark ‘GENERAL OPTICA’ for services in class 42 (Opticians' services) — Community trade mark No 573 774

Registered Community trade mark subject of the application for a declaration of invalidity:

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: General Óptica SA

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Party requesting the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark:

Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity: The earlier national trade name ‘Generalóptica’ for import and retail sale of optical, precision and photographic apparatus

Trade mark right of the party requesting the declaration of invalidity:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejection of the request for a declaration of invalidity

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of among others Article 8(1) and (4) of Council Regulation No 40/94 as there is a likelihood of confusion between the two signs and the applicant's sign is granted national protection.

Pleas in law:

Infringement of Rule 22 of Commission Regulation No 2868/95 as OHIM omitted its duty to ask the applicant to present evidence of the earlier use invoked.

---
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Kunal K. Singh,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed inrespect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the J.P. MorganChase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2012‐C6 (the "ExchangeAct periodic reports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required tobe provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is includedin the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB nd Exchange Act Rules 13a-18and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described insuch reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Master Servicer, Midland Loan Services, a Division ofPNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank NationalAssociation, as Trustee, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as CertificateAdministrator, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Custodian, PentalphaSurveillance LLC, as Senior Trust Advisor, CoreLogic Commercial Real EstateServices, Inc., as Servicing Function Participant, National Tax Search, LLC, asServicing Function Participant, and Holliday Fenoglio Fowler, LP, as PrimaryServicer.

 

 

 

Dated: March 25, 2019

 

 

/s/ Kunal K. Singh

 

 

President and ChiefExecutive Officer

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
###### Editorial Note on Part 900

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

#### § 900.163 What is the Secretary's burden of proof for appeals from decisions under § 900.150(a) through § 900.150(g)?

For those appeals, the Secretary has the burden of proof (as required by section 102(e)(1) of the Act) to establish by clearly demonstrating the validity of the grounds for declining the contract proposal.
###### Editorial Note on Part 900

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 900 appear at 67 FR 34602, May 15, 2002.

#### § 900.175 Will an appeal hurt an Indian tribe or tribal organization's position in other contract negotiations?

No. A pending appeal will not affect or prevent the negotiation or award of another contract.
### [§2430a. Renumbered §4203]
| (logo) WELLS

           FARGO | **Commercial  Mortgage Servicing**D1050-084,  8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334

 

  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is hereby made to that certain Poolingand Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2012, by and among DeutscheMortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank,National Association, as Master Servicer, Certificate Administrator, PayingAgent and Custodian, Midland Loan Services, a division of PNC Bank, NationalAssociation, as Special Servicer, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trusteeand Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as Operating Advisor, with respect toCommercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2012-CCRE2 (the"Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise definedshall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 10.11 of thisAgreement, Leslie Hayton, Managing Director of Commercial Mortgage Services andTimothy S. Ryan, Managing Director of Customer Relationship Management dohereby certify that:

 

1.       Areview of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January1, 2018 through December 31, 2018 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performanceper the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

2.       To thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilledall of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughoutthe Reporting Period.

 

 

INWITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28thday of February 2019.

 

 

/s/Leslie Hayton

DanielBober

ExecutiveVice President

WellsFargo Bank 

 

 

/s/Timothy S. Ryan 

TimothyS. Ryan

ManagingDirector

WellsFargo Bank

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank,  N.A. | (logo) Together  we’ll go far |
|-------------------------|-------------------------------------|
-  Home 
-  Training 
-  Hazmat 

# In This Section

                      -  Hazardous Materials Outreach & Engagement 
                      -  Training Requirements for Industry 
                      -  Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG) 
                      -  Workshops 
                      -  Webinars 
                      -  Community Liaisons (CLs) 
                      -  Publications 
                      -  Publicaciones (en español) 
                      -  Newsletters 
                      -  Training Modules 
                      -  Videos and Mobile Apps 
                      -  Contact Us 

# DOT Chart 17: Markings, Labeling, and Placarding Guide

Chart17-10-06-2022-508-REM.pdf (496.58 KB)

DOT Chart 17: Markings, Labeling, and Placarding Guide

**Description:**DOT Chart 17 is now available as a Section 508 Complaint portable document that operates in a variety of ways and does not rely on a single sense or ability of the user. For the adaptive user, this PDF contains accessible information in both visual and audio formats. The PDF uses accessibility-related software or peripheral devices to maximize use, while navigating tags and tabbing, descriptive text (ALT-text), color and graphics, and scalable views.
# C_2007082EN.01003901.xml

| 14.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/39

---

Action brought on 16 January 2007 — Miguel Torres, S.L. v OHIM

(Case T-17/07)

(2007/C 82/87)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Miguel Torres, S.L. (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: E. Armijo Chávarri, M. Baz de San Cerefino, A. Castán Pérez-Goméz, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Bodegas Navarro López, S.L

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

Form of order sought

| — | The annulment of the decision of the 1st Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 September 2006 issued in case no R1407/2005-1 with costs awarded against OHIM |
| --- | --- |

—

The annulment of the decision of the 1st Board of Appeal of OHIM of 26 September 2006 issued in case no R1407/2005-1 with costs awarded against OHIM

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Bodegas Navarro Lopéz, S.L.

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘CITA DEL SOL ’for products and services within classes 33 and 39 (application No. 2.712.982)

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Applicant

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community word mark ‘VIÑA SOL ’(mark no 462.523) and national word marks ‘VIÑA SOL ’for products within class 33, label ‘TORRES VIÑA SOL ’for products within class 33, national word mark ‘SOL ’for products within class 33.

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of objection

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Rejection of appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1) given that there is a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.

Pleas in law:

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark.

1

---
# C_2007042EN.01001102.xml

| 24.2.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 42/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 42/11

---

Action brought on 13 December 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-504/06)

(2007/C 42/19)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: L. Pignataro-Nolin and I. Kaufmann-Bühler, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Italian Republic

Defendant:

Forms of order sought

| — | declare that, by having failed to transpose correctly in Italian law Article 3(1) of Council Directive 92/57/EEC (1) of 24 June 1992 on the implementation of minimum safety and health requirements at temporary or mobile construction sites (eighth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC (2)), the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by having failed to transpose correctly in Italian law Article 3(1) of Council Directive 92/57/EEC (1) of 24 June 1992 on the implementation of minimum safety and health requirements at temporary or mobile construction sites (eighth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC (2)), the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

2

| — | order the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Under Italian law, constructions sites which correspond to less than 200 man-days and which do not involve work coming within the scope of Annex II to the Directive are covered solely by the coordination provisions contained in Article 7 of Decree No 626/1994. That article, however, imposes only a general obligation of cooperation and coordination on employers which, within the company or producer unit, assign work to contracting undertakings or to self-employed persons. Accordingly, it is not possible to conclude that the precise and detailed provisions of Directive 92/57/EEC relating to the coordination required during the drafting and execution phases of a project can be regarded as being implemented by the article of the Decree in question.

---

(1)  OJ 1992 L 245, p. 6.

1

(2)  OJ 1989 L 183, p. 1.

2

---
#### § 1000.148 What happens if an AFA expires before the effective date of the successor AFA?

If the effective date of a successor AFA is not on or before the expiration of the current AFA, subject to terms mutually agreed upon by the Tribe/Consortium and the Department at the time the current AFA was negotiated or in a subsequent amendment, the Tribe/Consortium may continue to carry out the program authorized under the AFA to the extent resources permit. During this extension period, the current AFA shall remain in effect, including coverage of the Tribe/Consortium under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) 28 U.S.C. 2671-2680 (1994); and the Tribe/Consortium may use any funds remaining under the AFA, savings from other programs or Tribal funds to carry out the program. Nothing in this section authorizes an AFA to be continued beyond the completion of the program authorized under the AFA or the amended AFA. This section also does not entitle a Tribe/Consortium to receive, nor does it prevent a Tribe from receiving, additional funding under any successor AFA. The successor AFA must provide funding to the Tribe/Consortium at a level necessary for the Tribe/Consortium to perform the programs, functions, services, and activities (PFSA) or portions thereof for the full period they were or will be performed.
#### MATHEWS v. BD. OF TRUSTEES OF ASHEVILLE POLICEMEN’S FUND

No. 549P89

Case below: 96 N.C.App. 186

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 1 March 1990.
# C_2007071EN.01004601.xml

| 28.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/46

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

27 March 2007

(2007/C 71/14)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3347 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 157,91 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4504 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,67900 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3182 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,6211 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 88,28 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,1270 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5805 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,986 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 247,56 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7097 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,8705 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,3618 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 33,591 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,8538 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6490 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5429 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,4288 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8579 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0242 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 255,62 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,6829 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,3218 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3765 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 173,13 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6054 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 64,079 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,6960 |
| THB | Thai baht | 43,200 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3347

JPY

Japanese yen

157,91

DKK

Danish krone

7,4504

GBP

Pound sterling

0,67900

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3182

CHF

Swiss franc

1,6211

ISK

Iceland króna

88,28

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,1270

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5805

CZK

Czech koruna

27,986

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

247,56

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7097

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,8705

RON

Romanian leu

3,3618

SKK

Slovak koruna

33,591

TRY

Turkish lira

1,8538

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6490

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5429

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,4288

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8579

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0242

KRW

South Korean won

1 255,62

ZAR

South African rand

9,6829

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,3218

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3765

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 173,13

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6054

PHP

Philippine peso

64,079

RUB

Russian rouble

34,6960

THB

Thai baht

43,200

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
### §1701z–7. Studies to determine extent of need for counseling to mortgagors; report to Congress

(a) In carrying out activities under section 1701z–1 of this title, the Secretary is directed to undertake programs of studies and demonstrations within at least three standard metropolitan statistical areas to determine the extent of need for and cost effectiveness of providing pre-purchase, default and delinquency counseling and related services to owners and purchasers of single-family dwellings insured or to be insured under the unsubsidized mortgage insurance programs of the National Housing Act [12 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.].

(b) Within one year from August 3, 1976, the Secretary shall submit an interim report to the Congress with respect to the progress made under such studies and demonstrations, including an estimate as to the date when a final report on the results of such demonstrations will be made available to the Congress.

(Pub. L. 91–609, title V, §508, as added Pub. L. 94–375, §26, Aug. 3, 1976, 90 Stat. 1078.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The National Housing Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is act June 27, 1934, ch. 847, 48 Stat. 1246, which is classified principally to this chapter (§1701 et seq.). For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 1701 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, and not as part of the National Housing Act which comprises this chapter.
### §1174. Liquidation

On request of a party in interest and after notice and a hearing, the court may, or, if a plan has not been confirmed under section 1173 of this title before five years after the date of the order for relief, the court shall, order the trustee to cease the debtor's operation and to collect and reduce to money all of the property of the estate in the same manner as if the case were a case under chapter 7 of this title.

(Pub. L. 95–598, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2644.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

#### legislative statements

Section 1174 of the House amendment represents a compromise between the House bill and Senate amendment on the issue of liquidation of a railroad. The provision permits a party in interest at any time to request liquidation. In addition, if a plan has not been confirmed under section 1173 of the House amendment before 5 years after the date of order for relief, the court must order the trustee to cease the debtor's operation and to collect and reduce to money all of the property of the estate in the same manner as if the case were a case under chapter 7 of title 11. The approach differs from the conversion to chapter 7 under section 1174 of the Senate bill in order to make special provisions contained in subchapter IV of chapter 11 applicable to liquidation. However, maintaining liquidation in the context of chapter 11 is not intended to delay liquidation of the railroad to a different extent than if the case were converted to chapter 7.

Although the House amendment does not adopt provisions contained in sections 1170(1), (2), (3), or (5), of the Senate amendment such provisions are contained explicitly or implicitly in section 1123 of the House amendment.

#### senate report no. 95–989

Section 1174 permits the court to convert the case to a liquidation under chapter 7 if the court finds that the debtor cannot be reorganized, or if various time limits specified in the subchapter are not met. Section 77 [section 205 of former title 11] does not authorize a liquidation of a railroad under the Bankruptcy Act [former title 11]. If the railroad is not reorganizable, the only action open to the court is to dismiss the petition, which would in all likelihood be followed by a State court receivership, with all of its attendant disadvantages. If reorganization is impossible, the debtor should be liquidated under the Bankruptcy Act.
### [§2135. Renumbered §16135]
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

        We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-62890 and No. 333-39171) and the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-63804, No. 333-59163, No. 333-59157, No.
333-21997, No. 33-86634, and No. 33-94872) pertaining to the 1992 Stock Option
Plan and the 1998 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Lynx Therapeutics, Inc. of our
report dated February 1, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements of Lynx Therapeutics, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended December 31, 2001.


                                            /s/   ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                            ------------------------------------


Palo Alto, California
March 29, 2002
#### §§ 720.104-720.109 [Reserved]
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 377

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to improve deliberation

on proposed Federal private sector mandates.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 16, 1999

Mr. CONDIT (for himself and Mr. PORTMAN) submitted the following

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules

RESOLUTION

Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to

improve deliberation on proposed Federal private sector

mandates.

1 Resolved, That clause 11(b) of rule XVIII of the

2 Rules of the House of Representatives is amended by

3 striking ‘‘intergovernmental’’ and by striking ‘‘section

4 424(a)(1)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 424(a)(1) or (b)(1)’’.

Æ