alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007095EN.01003403.xml

| 28.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/34

---

Action brought on 14 March 2007 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Hungary

(Case C-148/07)

(2007/C 95/67)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: V. Bottka and K. Mojzesowicz, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Hungary

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by failing to eliminate the restrictions to the provision of cable television services imposed by Article 115(4) of Law I of 1996 on Radio and Television, the Republic of Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Commission Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic communications networks and services (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to eliminate the restrictions to the provision of cable television services imposed by Article 115(4) of Law I of 1996 on Radio and Television, the Republic of Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Commission Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic communications networks and services (1);

1

| — | order Republic of Hungary to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Republic of Hungary to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposing the directive into national law expired on 30 April 2004.

According to the Commission, the Republic of Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 2(3) of Directive 2002/77/EC by restricting the right of cable television service providers to broadcast programmes so that in territorial coverage is no more than one third of the population.

---

(1)  OJ 2002 L 249, p. 21.

1

---
SERVED : JUN E16,201 1 U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC EO FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C INTH EMATTERO F CAROL EM . BEROTT EJOSEPH , Ph.D .

FAA DOCKE T NO . (Civi l Penalty Action ) FDM S NO . FAA-2011-029 2 

### 'MEN ! O F GHlAliO N UPFPAT'O M

' • ) O NOTIC EO FASSIGNMEN T O FPROCEEDIN G Thi s proceedin g (heretofor e designate da s Cas e No . 2011NE700058 ) ha s bee nassigne d t o th e undersigned . Al l future pleading s an dothe r communication s regardin g thi s proceedin g shal l b e serve do nth e Judge , th e FA A Hearin g Docket , an dth e othe r person s o nth e attache d Servic e List . 

# C / /

Attachmen t

- Servic e Lis t )nnie .

Chie f Administrativ e La

WJudg eFDM S NO . FAA-2011-029 2 (Civi l Penalty Action ) SER^ELIS T ORIGINA L& ON ECOP Y Federal Aviatio nAdministratio n""•J < 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-4a O Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit e 2WiO00 '

ONEGDP V Carol e M . Berott e Joseph , Ph.D. , Responden t 8 How e Stree t

* , • - Ashland , M A 01721-130 5 TEL : FAX : Matthe w J . Zappala , Complainant' s Counse l Offic e o f th e Regiona l Counsel , ANE- 7 . j New Englan dRegio n Federal Aviatio nAdministratio n 1 2 New Englan dExecutiv e Park Burlington , M A 01803-529 9 TEL : 781-238-704 6 FAX : 781-238-705 5 Th e Honorabl e Ronnie A . Yoder , Chie f Administrativ e Law Judg e U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n Offic e o f Hearings , M-20 , Roo mE12-32 0 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Washington , D C 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-214 2 FAX : 202-366-753 6

' Servic e wa s b y U.S . Mail . Fo

r servic e i n perso n o r b y < Aviatio n Administration

, 60 0 Independenc

e Avenue, S.W., ' D C 20591 ; Attention : Hearin

g Docke t Clerk , AGC-430 . I^couri^ , us e th e followin g address : Federa

l r^ti^Stuilding—Suite 2W1000, Washington , - 2 -
Marcia Bunger

On November 15, 2021, Marcia Bunger was named Administrator for the Risk Management Agency. 

She joins USDA after serving as a County Executive Director for USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) 

for 18 years. In total, she has over 25 years of experience working for USDA in the Farm Service 

Agency. In her role as County Executive Director, Bunger worked closely with Pine Ridge Tribal 

Government leaders and personnel to administer FSA programs on the second largest land based Indian 

Reservation in the U.S. She served 15 years on the South Dakota Advisory Council to the U.S. 

Commission on Civil Rights and previously held positions at Farm Credit Services of America, including 

Crop Insurance Specialist and Crop Insurance Officer. Recently, she founded an agriculture consulting 

limited liability company providing assistance to area farmers & ranchers and to work with a local crop 

insurance agency selling and servicing crop insurance policies. Bunger is also the owner and operator 

of a 2000-acre, family-owned farm. Bunger graduated cum laude and received her bachelor’s degree 

from Augustana College. She will be the first person who is a member of the Asian American and Pacific 

Islander community and the first woman to serve as Administrator for RMA.
§ 392.3 Required information. To be considered by FSIS, a petition must contain the following information: ( a ) The name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address (if available) of the person who is submitting the petition;
( b ) A full statement of the action requested by the petitioner, including the exact wording and citation of the existing regulation, if any, and the proposed regulation or amendment requested;
( c ) A full statement of the factual and legal basis on which the petitioner relies for the action requested in the petition, including all relevant information and views on which the petitioner relies, as well as information known to the petitioner that is unfavorable to the petitioner's position. The statement should identify the problem that the requested action is intended to address and explain why the requested action is necessary to address the problem.
Exhibit 32.2


                            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 six month
period ending January 27, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lawrence Tierney, Principal
Financial 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 Financial Officer
     March 9, 2007
# C_2010148EN.01004002.xml

| 5.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/40

---

Action brought on 30 March 2010 — Meda Pharma v OHIM — Nycomed (ALLERNIL)

(Case T-147/10)

2010/C 148/68

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Meda Pharma GmbH & Co. KG (Bad Homburg, Germany) (represented by: G. Würtenberger and R. Kunze, 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: Nycomed GmbH (Konstanz, Germany)

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

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of 29 September 2009 in Case R 697/2007-4 concerning the opposition filed on the basis of German mark No 1 042 583‘ALLERGODIL’ against application No 4 066 452 for the Community trade mark ‘ALLERNIL’; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of 29 September 2009 in Case R 697/2007-4 concerning the opposition filed on the basis of German mark No 1 042 583‘ALLERGODIL’ against application No 4 066 452 for the Community trade mark ‘ALLERNIL’;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Nycomed GmbH

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Word mark ‘ALLERNIL’ for goods in Class 5

Community trade mark concerned:

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

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: German word mark No 1 042 583‘ALLERGODIL’ for goods in Class 5

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejection of the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

Pleas in law:

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (1) since the trade mark law principles of likelihood of confusion were not correctly applied |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009, (1) since the trade mark law principles of likelihood of confusion were not correctly applied

1

| — | Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 due to breach of the duty to give reasons |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 due to breach of the duty to give reasons

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

1

---
### §1356. Review and approval of plans and programs by Secretary

The Secretary shall review the five-year plan and each annual program submitted by a designated agency under section 1354 or 1357 of this title, and shall approve only those which (1) bear the certification required by the Governor or his designee under section 1355 of this title; (2) comply with regulations and meet criteria that the Secretary shall promulgate and publish in the Federal Register; and (3) otherwise accomplish the purpose of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 89–182, §6, Sept. 14, 1965, 79 Stat. 681.)
### §4221. Filing of confidential declarations by private persons identifying specific assets

#### (a) In general

After the United States obtains a final judgment or settlement in any action referred to in section 4201 of this title, any person may file a declaration identifying specific assets which might be recovered by the United States in satisfaction of that judgment or settlement.

#### (b) Place of filing

A declaration under subsection (a) shall be filed with the Attorney General of the United States or with an agent designated by him for receiving declarations under this section.

(Pub. L. 101–647, title XXV, §2576, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4899.)
# C_2012006EN.01001302.xml

| 7.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/13

---

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 November 2011 — CTG Luxembourg PSF v Court of Justice

(Joined Cases T-170/10 and T-340/10) (1)

1

(Public service contracts - Procurement procedure - Provision of support services to IT systems users - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid because it was lodged out of time - Award of contract to another tenderer - Action for annulment - Non-contractual liability)

2012/C 6/21

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Computer Task Group Luxembourg PSF SA (CTG Luxembourg PSF) (Bertrange, Luxembourg) (represented by: M. Thewes and B. Marthoz, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Court of Justice of the European Union (represented by: A. Placco, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Applications (i) for annulment, first, of decision of the Court of Justice of 9 February 2010 to reject the tender submitted by the consortium of which the applicant is a member in the context of procurement procedure reference AO 008/2009 entitled ‘1st and 2nd level support for the users of IT and telephone systems, call centre, end user hardware management’ and, secondly, of the decision of 5 March 2010 confirming the rejection and, thirdly, the decision to award the contract to another tenderer, and (ii) for compensation for the loss allegedly incurred by the applicant as a result of those decisions.

st

nd

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the applications; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the applications;

| 2. | Orders Computer Task Group Luxembourg PSF SA (CTG Luxembourg PSF) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Computer Task Group Luxembourg PSF SA (CTG Luxembourg PSF) to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 19.6.2010.

1

---
Exhibit 23.1


                 CONSENT OF ODENBERG ULLAKKO MURANISHI & CO. LLP



              Consent of Independent Registered Public Accountants




We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statements  on Form S-8 (No.  333-56432)  of Asante  Technologies,  Inc.  of our
report  dated  January  26,  2004,  except  for note 7, as to which  the date is
February 11, 2004 relating to the financial  statements and financial  statement
schedule, which appear in this Form 10-K.





/s/ Odenberg Ullakko Muranishi & Co. LLP



Odenberg Ullakko Muranishi & Co. LLP
San Francisco, CA
March 2, 2004



                                       73
#### Morris Reisler, an Infant, etc., Respondent, v. John H. Springer, Appellant.

Motion granted on terms stated in order.
----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

----
§ 111.19 Civil proceedings (52 U.S.C. 30109(a)(6)). ( a ) If no conciliation agreement is finalized within the applicable minimum period specified by 11 CFR 111.18(c) the General Counsel may recommend to the Commission that the Commission authorize a civil action for relief in an appropriate court of the United States.
( b ) Upon recommendation of the General Counsel, the Commission may, by an affirmative vote of four (4) of its members, authorize the General Counsel to commence a civil action for relief in an appropriate court of the United States.
( c ) The provisions of 11 CFR 111.18(c) shall not preclude the Commission upon request of a respondent, from entering into a conciliation agreement even after a recommendation to file a civil action has been made pursuant to this section. Any conciliation agreement reached under this subsection is subject to the provisions of 11 CFR 111.18(b) and shall have the same force and effect as a conciliation agreement reached under 11 CFR 111.18(c).
### §1012. Regulation by State law; Federal law relating specifically to insurance; applicability of certain Federal laws after June 30, 1948

#### (a) State regulation

The business of insurance, and every person engaged therein, shall be subject to the laws of the several States which relate to the regulation or taxation of such business.

#### (b) Federal regulation

No Act of Congress shall be construed to invalidate, impair, or supersede any law enacted by any State for the purpose of regulating the business of insurance, or which imposes a fee or tax upon such business, unless such Act specifically relates to the business of insurance: Provided, That after June 30, 1948, the Act of July 2, 1890, as amended, known as the Sherman Act, and the Act of October 15, 1914, as amended, known as the Clayton Act, and the Act of September 26, 1914, known as the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended [15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.], shall be applicable to the business of insurance to the extent that such business is not regulated by State Law.

(Mar. 9, 1945, ch. 20, §2, 59 Stat. 34; July 25, 1947, ch. 326, 61 Stat. 448.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Act of July 2, 1890, as amended, known as the Sherman Act, referred to in subsec. (b), is classified to sections 1 to 7 of this title.

Act of October 15, 1914, as amended, known as the Clayton Act, referred to in subsec. (b), is act Oct. 15, 1914, ch. 323, 38 Stat. 730, which is classified generally to sections 12, 13, 14 to 19, 21, and 22 to 27 of this title and to sections 52 and 53 of Title 29, Labor. For further details and complete classification of this Act to the Code, see References in Text note set out under section 12 of this title and Tables.

Act of September 26, 1914, known as the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, referred to in subsec. (b), is classified generally to subchapter I (§41 et seq.) of chapter 2 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 58 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

1947—Act July 25, 1947, substituted "June 30, 1948" for "January 1, 1948".
### §1944. Grade of permanent commissioned teaching staff

Professors shall be commissioned officers with grade not above captain, associate and assistant professors with grade not above commander, and instructors with grade not above lieutenant commander. All officers of the permanent commissioned teaching staff shall receive the pay and allowances of other commissioned officers of the same grade and length of service. When any such professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor is appointed or commissioned with grade less than the highest grade permitted, he shall be promoted under regulations prescribed by the Secretary.

(Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, 63 Stat. 509, §189; Pub. L. 86–474, §1(12), May 14, 1960, 74 Stat. 145; renumbered §1944, Pub. L. 115–282, title I, §110(b), Dec. 4, 2018, 132 Stat. 4212.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 14, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §15c (Apr. 16, 1937, ch. 107, §2, 50 Stat. 66).

Said section has been divided. The last sentence is incorporated in section 187 of this title. The other provisions are incorporated in this section.

The limitation on grade of professors is raised from Commander to Captain, and other limitations as to grades within the new permanent commissioned teaching staff are established.

This section prescribes the relative ranks for the various grades in the permanent commissioned teaching staff, establishes the pay as heretofore, and provides for promotion as the Secretary shall prescribe. 81st Congress, House Report No. 557.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–282 renumbered section 189 of this title as this section.

1960—Pub. L. 86–474 substituted "and instructors with grade not above" for "and commissioned instructors with grade not above", and "assistant professor, or instructor" for "or assistant professor".
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Consolidated Statement of Operations and the Consolidated Balance Sheets
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1998
<CASH>                                          19,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   60,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,400
<INVENTORY>                                    227,900
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               343,500
<PP&E>                                         355,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 158,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 598,200
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          237,800
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,500
<OTHER-SE>                                     219,500
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   598,200
<SALES>                                        276,600
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               276,600
<CGS>                                          140,600
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  140,600
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                33,500
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 32,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    22,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.61<F1>
<FN>
<F1>The Company declared a two-for-one stock split to holders of record July 25,
1997 with shares being distributed on August 8, 1997; thus, earnings per share
and all other share amounts have been restated.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### § 548.4 [Reserved]
§ 51.32 Claims not allowed. Claims for indemnity for goats, sheep, and horses destroyed because of brucellosis will not be allowed if any of the following circumstances exist: ( a ) The claimant has failed to comply with any of the requirements of this part;
( b ) The claim is based on a brucellosis test, and the person who administered the test was not properly trained, authorized, or certified at the time of the test;
( c ) Testing of goats, sheep, and horses in the herd or flock for brucellosis was not done under APHIS or State supervision, or by an accredited veterinarian;
( d ) There is substantial evidence that the claim is an unlawful or improper attempt to obtain indemnity; or
( e ) If, at the time of test or condemnation, the animals belonged to or were upon the premises of any person to whom they had been sold for slaughter, shipped for slaughter, or delivered for slaughter.
#### § 540.2 Specimens for educational, research, and other nonfood purposes; permits.

The requirements of 9 CFR 314.9 apply to the handling and release of specimens of condemned or other inedible fish materials.