alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2011013EN.01004101.xml

| 15.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 13/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/41

---

Action brought on 4 October 2010 — Carpenito v Council

(Case F-94/10)

()

2011/C 13/81

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Renzo Carpenito (Overijse, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and S. Rodrigues, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for the retention of the effects of the contested salary statements until the adoption of a regulation replacing, with retroactive effect, Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1296/2009 of 23 December 2009, and for compensation in respect of the applicant’s financial loss and his pain and suffering

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Retain the effects of the contested salary statements until the adoption of a regulation replacing, with retroactive effect, Regulation No 1296/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Retain the effects of the contested salary statements until the adoption of a regulation replacing, with retroactive effect, Regulation No 1296/2009;

| — | order the Council to compensate the applicant for his financial loss in an amount equivalent to the loss of remuneration resulting from the manifestly unlawful application of Regulation No 1296/2009, to which must be added reimbursement of the special monthly charge deducted since January 2010 pursuant to Article 66a of the Statute, the rate of which was wrongly fixed in the light of that regulation. That amount is estimated, subject to the Civil Service Tribunal’s interpretation, at EUR 30 000; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to compensate the applicant for his financial loss in an amount equivalent to the loss of remuneration resulting from the manifestly unlawful application of Regulation No 1296/2009, to which must be added reimbursement of the special monthly charge deducted since January 2010 pursuant to Article 66a of the Statute, the rate of which was wrongly fixed in the light of that regulation. That amount is estimated, subject to the Civil Service Tribunal’s interpretation, at EUR 30 000;

| — | order the Council to pay the applicant the symbolic amount of EUR 1 as compensation for his pain and suffering; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the applicant the symbolic amount of EUR 1 as compensation for his pain and suffering;

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

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

---
# C_2012025EN.01004902.xml

| 28.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/49

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 December 2011 — El Corte Inglés v OHIM — Azzedine Alaïa (ALIA)

(Case T-152/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ALIA - Earlier Community figurative mark ALAÏA PARIS - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

(2012/C 25/94)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, M.E. López Camba and E. Seijo Veiguela, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: R. Pethke, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Azzedine Alaïa (Paris, France) (represented by: M. Holah, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 February 2010 (Case R 924/2008-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Azzedine Alaïa and El Corte Inglés, SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 3 February 2010 (Case R 924/2008-4) in so far as the Board of Appeal excluded the goods in Class 3 corresponding to the description ‘Perfumery, essential oils, cosmetics, hair lotions; dentifrices’ from its analysis of the likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 3 February 2010 (Case R 924/2008-4) in so far as the Board of Appeal excluded the goods in Class 3 corresponding to the description ‘Perfumery, essential oils, cosmetics, hair lotions; dentifrices’ from its analysis of the likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder.

| 3. | Orders El Corte Inglés, SA, OHIM and Mr Azzedine Alaïa each to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders El Corte Inglés, SA, OHIM and Mr Azzedine Alaïa each to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 148, 5.6.2010.

---
#### § 351.19 Refusal of certification for specific lots.

If an inspector has reason to believe that a lot of technical animal fat is ineligible for certification under § 351.3, or any materials to be used in a lot of technical animal fat would make the technical animal fat ineligible for such certification, certification of the lot shall be withheld pending final determination by the circuit supervisor. The operator of the plant shall be afforded an opportunity to demonstrate the eligibility of the lot for certification before the final determination is made.
CL, Wd OAS ONG
Py oon ea \

*\ 8 Hr
a ri ee

ree
%

~ eye
Nes

SN 4
\
set Xt tet
2 Sane ic ve
, Ye , J
4 y rats : it
\ Me § - BS

x.

mi Yi

\

Or
x

‘

ay WON
We 4
ae oe vA ‘leet

. 7 * a ie < y ee,
ire tS ty Vee Cas EA a
i Lo RS KS aS, v. Lk . a Au
- . j HS tip rE sv 4 a A .
S °F s sary \ Ds RY
o A MS \ ' a OY \
Ye ny “aN o 4
a % 8

M8)
20°
Ho
Pe) XS Sn
ya
i

f

vy ol. YY o\
;
s

TRANS
Ry .
Nee
StS
\

\
|

(7
Lad

eas
FAN aN

IK
)
\
}

K
ty
N

a AGS ME
9827 S$: N
Vella: xo CIN
ccea BY SA RST
) ° Re
a
. ‘ “ay \\
D \

VINUCAITO "SNIA 1300 (OH NVId
Ted SOA doy |

“ERI -7

\ \ Mh Uy Vi = “c :
oe of
eae

Not to be used for Navigation

‘ae

uvszok
# C_2007117EN.01001802.xml

| 26.5.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/18

---

Action brought on 22 March 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-159/07)

(2007/C 117/30)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: K. Simonsson and P. Andrade, acting as 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 Commission Directive 2005/23/EC (1) of 8 March 2005 amending Directive 2001/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the minimum level of training of seafarers or, in any event, 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 Commission Directive 2005/23/EC (1) of 8 March 2005 amending Directive 2001/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the minimum level of training of seafarers or, in any event, 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 prescribed for transposition of the directive into domestic law expired on 29 September 2005.

---

(1)  OJ 2005 L 62, p. 14.

1

---
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
You havereached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC)Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC.Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite ofcataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications.  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the eventthat publications are no longer available from the original publishing agencysite. (Historical purposes)
**Title:****Sub-SaharanAfrica, factors affecting trade patterns of selected industries.**** 
SuDocNumber:ITC1.1/2-2:
ItemNumber:0980-E(online), 0977-B-01 (online)
CGPSystem Number:000600827
 
2007 | 2008| 2009
 
March4, 2020**
#### § 55.4 Disinfection of premises, conveyances, and materials.

After cervids are destroyed in accordance with this part, all premises, including barns, stockyards and pens, all cars and other conveyances, and all other materials on any premises or conveyances used to house or transport such cervids must be cleaned and disinfected under the supervision of an APHIS employee or a State representative, using methods specified by the APHIS employee or a State representative. Premises may not be restocked with cervids until after the date specified in the herd plan required by § 55.7(b) of this part. The owner to whom the indemnity is paid will be responsible for expenses incurred in connection with the cleaning and disinfection, except that APHIS or a State will pay for cleaning and disinfection of the conveyances used to transport the cervids to the location of disposal. However, APHIS may also decide to pay the cost of cleaning and disinfecting premises when the procedures needed to conduct effective cleaning and disinfection are unusually extensive and require methods that are not normally available on a premises. For example, normal procedures would include washing surfaces with high-pressure hoses and disinfectants and burying or burning contaminated materials. Unusually extensive procedures would include disposing of contaminated materials by digestive disposal or high-temperature incineration.
#### Andrew Ragor *et al. v.*James S. Kendall.

*Judgment—against two, will he reversed, where there is no evidence against one of defendants. A*joint judgment against two defendants in trespass, as the owners of an omnibus, for running into a carriage, where there is no evidence of ownership or interest as to one of the defendants, can not be sustained on appeal or error.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Lambert Tree, Judge, presiding.

Mr. B. W. Ellis, for the appellants.

Mr. John Woodbbidge, for the appellee.

Mr. Chief Justice Breese

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was an action of trespass, in the Cook circuit court, against Andrew Bagor and Peter Bagor, as owners of an omnibus employed upon a public street in the city of Chicago, to recover damages for violently driving the same against the carriage of the plaintiff, by which the same was greatly injured, and the horse attached to the same also injured.

The jury rendered a verdict for the plaintiff, on which the court rendered judgment, to reverse which the defendants appeal.

However just this judgment may be, it can not stand. The action is brought against Andrew and Peter Bagor. There is no evidence in the record to charge Peter Bagor. He is not shown to have been an owner, or to have any interest whatever in the omnibus. Counsel for appellee is mistaken in saying, *“*it was proved in evidence ” that the defendants were the owners of the offending omnibus. The record contains no such evidence. It shows that Andrew Bagor was *96one of the proprietors, but it was not shown who were the others. Peter Eagor’s name is not mentioned in this connection. A verdict and judgment wholly unsupported by the evidence, can not stand.

The judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.

*Judgment reversed.*
Attachment 001

This page has been omitted as Confidential Business Information
### **CHAPTER 64—METHANE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION**

Sec.
3801.
Congressional statement of findings and declaration of policy.
3802.
Definitions.
3803.
Duties of Secretary of Energy.
3804.
Coordination with other Federal departments and agencies.
3805.
Research and development activities.
3806.
Demonstrations.
3807.
Use of methane-fueled vehicles by Federal agencies and departments.
3808.
Repealed.
3809.
Authorization of appropriations; required funding.
3810.
Relationship to other laws.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Philip
A. Baratelli, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Amendment No. 1 to
Annual Report of Clarus Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual
Report on Form 10-K/A fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Clarus Corporation.





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.





Date:  April 23,
    2010By: /s/Philip A.
  BaratelliPhilip
      A. BaratelliChief
      Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>                         0000912908
<NAME>                        FOAMEX INTERNATIONAL INC
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Dec-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                          Dec-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                            Dec-28-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1
<CASH>                                       12,044
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               175,684
<ALLOWANCES>                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                 120,299
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            370,928
<PP&E>                                      233,435
<DEPRECIATION>                                    0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              898,623
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       232,447
<BONDS>                                     735,724
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                        269
<OTHER-SE>                                  (94,486)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                898,623
<SALES>                                     931,095
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            931,095
<CGS>                                       787,756
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               787,756
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             67,139
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           50,570
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               6,656
<INCOME-TAX>                                  2,525
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           4,131
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                (42,345)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (1.68)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (1.65)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 20.1


Chase Manhattan Grantor Trust 1995-B

From: The Chase Manhattan Bank

To:   Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.


                   MONTHLY CERTIFICATEHOLDER'S REPORT
                   ----------------------------------

Due Period 12 Beginning Date                     10/01/1996
Due Period 12 End Date                           10/31/1996
Determination Date                               11/08/1996
Remittance Date                                  11/15/1996


I.    Monthly Principal and Principal Carryover Shortfall to Certificateholders
      (Per $1000 of Original Principal Amount)                  $ 30.1822444449

II.   Monthly Interest and Unpaid Interest to Certificateholders
      (Per $1000 of Original Principal Amount)                   $ 3.1634335587

III.  Monthly Expenses Summary

      A. Servicing Fee Disbursement                                $ 802,098.32
      B. Cash Collateral Account Expense                                 $ 0.00
      C. Total Expenses paid
         (per $1000 of Original Principal Amount)                $ 0.5361751781

IV.   Cash Collateral Account Deposit Amount                             $ 0.00

V.    Outstanding Advance Summary

      A. From Prior Period                                       $ 3,552,484.27
      B. From Current Period                                     $ 3,709,149.96
      C. Change in Amount Between Periods (Lines B - A)            $ 156,665.69

VI.   Pool Factor Information

      A. Certificate Principal Balance                         $ 917,366,460.96
      B. Initial Certificate Balance                         $ 1,495,963,171.74
      C. Pool Factor (Lines A / B)                               0.613227971310

VII.  Available Cash Collateral Account Information for Due Period

      A. Available Cash Collateral Amount                       $ 48,125,899.35
      B. Available Cash Collateral Amount Percentage            4.999999999532%

VIII. Required Cash Collateral Amount

      A. For the Current Collection Period                      $ 48,125,899.35
      B. For the Next Collection Period                         $ 45,868,323.05
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Charles Reith, Relator, v. Nicholas J. Hayes, as Fire Commissioner of the City of New York, Respondent.

Reargument ordered and case set down for January 18, 1908. Present — Woodward, Jenks, Rich and Miller, JJ.
§ 381.214 Movement of poultry or other article detained; removal of official marks. ( a ) No poultry or other article detained in accordance with the provisions in this subpart shall be moved by any person from the place at which it is located when so detained, until released by an authorized representative of the Secretary: *Provided,* That any such article may be moved from the place at which it is located when so detained, for refrigeration or freezing, or storage purposes if such movement has been approved by an authorized representative of the Secretary and the article so moved will be further detained by an authorized representative of the Secretary after such movement.
( b ) Upon terminating the detention of such article, an authorized representative of the Secretary shall: ( 1 ) Orally notify the immediate custodian of the released article, and
( 2 ) Furnish copies of a completed “Notice of Termination of Detention” (FSIS Form 8400-1) to the persons notified when the article was detained. The notice shall be served by either delivering the notice to such persons or by certifying and mailing the notice to such persons at their last known residences or principal offices or places of business.
( c ) All official marks may be required by such representative to be removed from such article before it is released unless it appears to the satisfaction of the representative that the article is eligible to retain such marks.
[37 FR 9706, May 16, 1972, as amended at 55 FR 47843, Nov. 16, 1990]
1

----

  

----

|   |   Name: |   Chris Ballinger |
|--------|--------------|------------------------|

|   | Title: |   Senior Vice President and |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------|
#### § 312.1 General.

The marks, devices, and certificates prescribed or referenced in this part shall be official marks, devices, and certificates for purposes of the Act, and shall be used in accordance with the provisions of this part and the regulations cited therein.
#### § 541.1 General.

The marks, devices, and certificates prescribed or referenced in this part are official marks, devices, and certificates for the purposes of the Act respecting fish and fish products. The marks, devices, and certificates shall be used only in accordance with the regulations in this part.
#### § 318.21 [Reserved]
§ 3.155 Feeding. ( a ) The diet for birds must be appropriate for the species, size, age, and condition of the bird. The food must be wholesome, palatable to the birds, and free of contamination. It must be of sufficient quantity and nutritive value to maintain a healthy condition and weight range of the bird and to meet its normal daily nutritional requirements. Birds must be fed at least once a day except as directed by the attending veterinarian, normal fasts, or other professionally accepted practices. If birds are maintained in group housing, measures appropriate for the species must be taken to ensure that all the birds receive a sufficient quantity of food.
( b ) Food and, if used, food receptacles must be readily accessible to all the birds being fed. Food and any food receptacles must be located so as to minimize any risk of contamination by excreta, precipitation, and pests. Food receptacles and feeding areas must be kept clean and sanitized in accordance with § 3.158. Used food receptacles must be cleaned and sanitized before they can be used to provide food to birds maintained in a separate enclosure. Measures must be taken to ensure there is no molding, deterioration, contamination, or caking or undesirable wetting or freezing of food within or on food receptacles. Food receptacles must be made of a durable material that can be easily cleaned and sanitized or be replaceable when worn or soiled. Group-housed birds must have multiple food receptacles where needed to ensure that all birds have access to sufficient feed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 June 28, 2016

a0620

Order 

Clerk

June 28, 2016

151708(26)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 151708

COA: 326015

Wayne CC: 10-013362-FC

GERALD JEROME EALY,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s March 29, 

2016 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
Exhibit 99.2


                            CERTIFICATION 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 accompanying Quarterly Report of Jupiter Marine
International Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
period ending April 26, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lawrence Tierney, Principal
Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the
best of my knowledge, that:

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

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


By: /s/ Lawrence Tierney
    --------------------
    Lawrence Tierney
    Principal Accounting Officer
    July 17, 2003