alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2023202EN.01004901.xml

| 9.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 202/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 202/49

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.11078 – CONTARGO / ZIEGLER / SCHMID / JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 202/11)

1.

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| — | Contargo GmbH & Co. KG (‘Contargo’), controlled by Rhenus SE & Co. KG, belonging to the Rethmann-Group (all GERMANY), |
| --- | --- |

—

Contargo GmbH & Co. KG (‘Contargo’), controlled by Rhenus SE & Co. KG, belonging to the Rethmann-Group (all GERMANY),

| — | Ziegler Holding GmbH (‘Ziegler’, GERMANY), |
| --- | --- |

—

Ziegler Holding GmbH (‘Ziegler’, GERMANY),

| — | SFI GmbH, controlled by the Schmid Group (‘Schmid’, GERMANY). |
| --- | --- |

—

SFI GmbH, controlled by the Schmid Group (‘Schmid’, GERMANY).

Rhenus SE & Co. KG, Ziegler Holding GmbH and SFI GmbH will acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control of the JV.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares in a newly created company constituting a joint venture.

2.

| — | Contargo is active in the provision of services related to freight transport, contract logistics, transport logistics and port logistics; |
| --- | --- |

—

Contargo is active in the provision of services related to freight transport, contract logistics, transport logistics and port logistics;

| — | Ziegler is active in the provision of services related to freight transport, transport logistics; |
| --- | --- |

—

Ziegler is active in the provision of services related to freight transport, transport logistics;

| — | Schmid is active in the provision of services related to freight transport, transport logistics. |
| --- | --- |

—

Schmid is active in the provision of services related to freight transport, transport logistics.

3.

The business activities of the JV are the following: container handling.

4.

Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

5.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.11078 – CONTARGO / ZIEGLER / SCHMID / JV

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email or by post. Please use the contact details below:

Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu

Postal address:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

1

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

2

---
Exhibit 21.1
 Outdoor Channel Holdings, Inc.
  State ofIncorporation/Name
    
    Organization
    
    Percent Held43455 BPD, LLC
    
    California
    
    100%OC Corporation
    
    California
    
    100%Winnercomm, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    100%The Outdoor Channel, Inc.
    
    Nevada
    
    100% (held by OC Corporation)SkyCam, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    100% (held by Winnercomm, Inc.)CableCam, Inc.
    
    Delaware
    
    100% (held by Winnercomm, Inc.)
#### MACK, Appellant, v. MAYOR, ETC., OF CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 6, 1903.)

Action by Michael J. Mack *1140against the Mayor,. Aldermen, and Commonalty oí the City of New York! L. L. Kellogg, for appellant. T. Connolly, for respondent.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the opinion of the court below. *75*N. Y. Supp. 809.
§ 56.6501 Nonelectric initiation systems. ( a ) When the nonelectric initiation system uses shock tube— ( 1 ) Connections with other initiation devices shall be secured in a manner which provides for uninterrupted propagation;
( 2 ) Factory-made units shall be used as assembled and shall not be cut except that a single splice is permitted on the lead-in trunkline during dry conditions; and
( 3 ) Connections between blastholes shall not be made until immediately prior to clearing the blast site when surface delay detonators are used.
( b ) When the nonelectric initiation system uses detonating cord— ( 1 ) The line of detonating cord extending out of a blasthole shall be cut from the supply spool immediately after the attached explosive is correctly positioned in the hole;
( 2 ) In multiple row blasts, the trunkline layout shall be designed so that the detonation can reach each blasthole from at least two directions;
( 3 ) Connections shall be tight and kept at right angles to the trunkline;
( 4 ) Detonators shall be attached securely to the side of the detonating cord and pointed in the direction in which detonation is to proceed;
( 5 ) Connections between blastholes shall not be made until immediately prior to clearing the blast site when surface delay detonators are used; and
( 6 ) Lead-in lines shall be manually unreeled if connected to the trunklines at the blast site.
( c ) When the nonelectric initiation system uses gas tube, continuity of the circuit shall be tested prior to blasting.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

EXHIBIT 10.29    
  


 
 

CERTIFICATION OF
  CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
  DUPONT PHOTOMASKS, INC.    
  


I,
Peter S. Kirlin, Chief Executive Officer of DuPont Photomasks, Inc. (the "Company"), 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 on Form 10-Q (the "Report") for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2002 and filed with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission, do hereby certify that to my knowledge: 


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



	2.
	The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company in respect of those items required
to be described or presented in such Report under Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 






	/s/  PETER S. KIRLIN      
 Peter S. Kirlin

Chief Executive Officer
	

November 13, 2002





I, Satish Rishi, Chief Financial Officer of DuPont Photomasks, Inc. (the "Company"), 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 on Form 10-Q (the "Report") for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2002 and filed with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission, do hereby certify that to my knowledge: 


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



	2.
	The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company in respect of those items required
to be described or presented in such Report under Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 






	/s/  SATISH RISHI      
 Satish Rishi

Chief Financial Officer
	

November 13, 2002











QuickLinks



EXHIBIT 10.29


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DUPONT PHOTOMASKS, INC.
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 95-30589

_______________________

HENRY JAMES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TERRY TERRELL, Warden;

MILLER, Sergeant;

B. THOMPSON, Sergeant,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

(CA-94-0410)

_________________________________________________________________

May 07, 1996

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, JONES, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Henry James (“James”), an inmate of the Allen

Correctional Center, has appealed the dismissal of his civil rights

action for failure to state a claim against Warden Terry Terrell

and two correctional officers.

As his appellate brief, James offers no additional

argument whatsoever on any of the asserted legal issues, but rather

merely files a Xerox copy of his supplemental civil rights
2

complaint, his motion for leave to file it, his opposition to a

memorandum filed by the defendants, and the prayer for relief of

his original complaint. 

Nowhere in this purported appellate brief does James

either state or argue any issue on appeal before this court. As a

result, this court AFFIRMS the judgment of the district court

without considering it on its merits. See Al-Ra’id v. Ingle, 69

F.3d 28 (5th Cir. 1995) (holding that “[a]n appellant’s brief must

contain an argument on the issues that are raised, in order that

we, as a reviewing court, may know what action of the district

court is being complained of. There is no exemption for pro se

litigants, though we construe their briefs liberally.”) (citations

omitted); Weaver v. Puckett, 896 F.2d 126 (5th Cir. 1990) (prisoner

abandons objection if he does not provide an argument containing

the reasons justifying the requested relief “with citation to the

authorities, statutes and parts of the record relied on.”)

(citations omitted); Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(6) (requiring that the

brief of the appellant contain a developed argument).

CONCLUSION 

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district

court dismissing James’ complaint for failure to state a cognizable

claim is AFFIRMED.
#### Vincent Nugent v. Kenneth D. Molloy et al.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, without costs. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens, Eager and Noonan, JJ.
Exhibit 32-63
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U. S. C. SECTION 1350  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: April 27, 2011
    
    /S/ GERARD M. ANDERSON

Gerard M. AndersonChairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officerof The Detroit Edison Company
Editorial Note on Part 1206
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1206 (formerly part 206) appear at 67 FR 19111, Apr. 18, 2002.

§ 1206.181 How do I establish processing costs for dual accounting purposes when I do not process the gas? Where accounting for comparison (dual accounting) is required for gas production from a lease but neither you nor someone acting on your behalf processes the gas, and you have elected to perform actual dual accounting under § 1206.176, you must use the first applicable of the following methods to establish processing costs for dual accounting purposes: ( a ) The average of the costs established in your current arm's-length processing agreements for gas from the lease, provided that some gas has previously been processed under these agreements.
( b ) The average of the costs established in your current arm's-length processing agreements for gas from the lease, provided that the agreements are in effect for plants to which the lease is physically connected and under which gas from other leases in the field or area is being or has been processed.
( c ) A proposed comparable processing fee submitted to either the tribe and ONRR (for tribal leases) or ONRR (for allotted leases) with your supporting documentation submitted to ONRR. If ONRR does not take action on your proposal within 120 days, the proposal will be deemed to be denied and subject to appeal to the ONRR Director under 30 CFR part 1290.
( d ) Processing costs based on the regulations in §§ 1206.179 and 1206.180.
Exhibit 32.1
                                                                   ------------

                              CERTIFICATION OF THE
                        JOINT CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
                         Pursuant to Section 906 of the
                           Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Trident Rowan Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark S.
Hauser, Joint Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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

                                          /s/ Mark S. Hauser
                                          -----------------------------
                                          Mark S. Hauser
                                          Joint Chief Executive Officer
                                          May 25, 2004
#### PURDY, Appellant, v. CLOCKE et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

February 15, 1905.)

Action by R. Anna Purdy against G. De Witt Cloeke and T. Emory Clocke. No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
§ 705.19 Resolving prohibited interests. ( a ) Actions to be taken by the Head of the State Regulatory Authority: ( 1 ) Remedial action to effect resolution. If an employee has a prohibited financial interest, the Head of the State Regulatory Authority shall promptly advise the employee that remedial action which will resolve the prohibited interest is required within 90 days.
( 2 ) Remedial action may include: ( i ) Reassignment of the employee to a position which performs no function or duty under the Act, or
( ii ) Divestiture of the prohibited financial interest, or
( iii ) Other appropriate action which either eliminates the prohibited interest or eliminates the situation which creates the conflict.
( 3 ) Reports of noncompliance. If 90 days after an employee is notified to take remedial action that employee is not in compliance with the requirements of the Act and these regulations, the Head of the State Regulatory Authority shall report the facts of the situation to the Director who shall determine whether action to impose the penalties prescribed by the Act should be initiated. The report to the Director shall include the original or a certified true copy of the employee's statement and any other information pertinent to the Director's determination, including a statement of actions being taken at the time the report is made.
( b ) Actions to be taken by the Director: ( 1 ) Remedial action to effect resolution. Violations of the regulations in this part of the Head of a State Regulatory Authority, will be cause for remedial action by the Governor of the State or other appropriate State official based on recommendations from the Director on behalf of the Secretary. The Governor or other appropriate State official shall promptly advise the Head of the State Regulatory Authority that remedial action which will resolve the prohibited interest is required within 90 days.
( 2 ) Remedial action should be consistent with the procedures prescribed for other State employees by § 705.19(a)(2).
( 3 ) Reports on noncompliance. ( i ) If 90 days after the Head of State Regulatory Authority is notified to take remedial action the Governor or other appropriate State official notifies the Director that the Head of the State Regulatory Authority is not in compliance with the Act and these regulations, the Director shall report the facts of the situation to the Secretary who shall determine whether the action to impose the penalties prescribed by the Act, or to impose the eligibility restrictions prescribed by § 705.1 should be initiated.
( ii ) Within 30 days of receipt of a noncompliance report from the Head of a Regulatory Authority under § 705.19(a)(3), the Director shall notify the Head of the State Regulatory Authority and the employee involved of additional action to be taken. Actions which the Director may take include but are not limited to the granting of additional time for resolution or the initiation of action to impose the penalties prescribed by the Act.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1

                                      CSFB (USA), INC.
                       STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO
                            FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED DIVIDENDS
                              (In thousands, except for ratio)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                     FOR THE
                                                                                                    NINE MONTHS
                                                  FOR THE YEARS ENDED                                  ENDED
                                     ----------------------------------------------------------    -------------
                                         1995        1996        1997        1998        1999           9/00
<S>                                  <C>          <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>           <C>
Earnings:

  Income before provision for
   income taxes                      $  298,500   $  473,800  $  661,100  $  600,500  $  953,500    $   725,700

Add: Fixed Charges
  Interest expense (gross)            2,699,769    2,865,800   4,012,209   4,501,242   4,839,810      5,451,692

  Interest factor in rents               22,064       25,515      29,351      38,517      52,563         44,133
                                     ----------   ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------     ----------

  Total fixed charges                 2,721,833    2,891,315   4,041,560   4,539,759   4,892,373      5,495,825

Add: Preferred dividends                 19,868       18,653      12,144      21,310      21,180         15,867

  Combined fixed charges and
    preferred dividends               2,741,701    2,909,968   4,053,704   4,561,069   4,913,553      5,511,692

Earnings before fixed charges
  and provision for income taxes     $3,020,333   $3,365,115  $4,702,660  $5,140,259  $5,845,873     $6,221,525
                                     ==========   ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========     ==========
Ratio of earnings to fixed
  charges and preferred dividends          1.10         1.16        1.16        1.13        1.19           1.13
                                     ==========   ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========     ==========

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                   EXHIBIT 12-26
                           THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                         Nine Months
                                                            Ended
                                                         September 30              Twelve Months Ended December 31
                                                         ------------    -----------------------------------------------
(Millions of Dollars)                                        2006          2005      2004      2003     2002      2001
                                                         -----------     -------   -------   -------   -------   -------
<S>                                                      <C>             <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>
EARNINGS:
    Pretax earnings..................................... $       382     $   426   $   214   $   397   $   534   $   320
    Fixed charges ......................................         221         280       294       294       322       314
                                                         -----------     -------   -------   -------   -------   -------
NET EARNINGS ........................................... $       603     $   706   $   508   $   691   $   856   $   634
                                                         -----------     -------   -------   -------   -------   -------
FIXED CHARGES:
    Interest expense.................................... $       208     $   267   $   280   $   284   $   319   $   306
       Adjustments .....................................          13          13        14        10         3         8
                                                         -----------     -------   -------   -------   -------   -------
FIXED CHARGES .......................................... $       221     $   280   $   294   $   294   $   322   $   314
                                                         -----------     -------   -------   -------   -------   -------
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges .....................        2.73        2.52      1.73      2.35      2.66      2.02
                                                         ===========     =======   =======   =======   =======   =======
</TABLE>
H. R. 9580 

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2777 Brentwood Road in Raleigh, North Carolina, as the ‘‘Millie Dunn Veasey Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. MILLIE DUNN VEASEY POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 2777 Brentwood Road in Raleigh, North Carolina, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Millie Dunn Veasey Post 

Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Millie Dunn Veasey Post Office’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### § 585.541 What is a qualified project for revenue sharing purposes?

A qualified project for the purpose of revenue sharing with eligible coastal States is one authorized under subsection 8(p) of the OCS Lands Act, which includes acreage within the area extending 3 miles seaward of State submerged lands. A qualified project is subject to revenue sharing with those States that are eligible for revenue sharing under § 585.542. The entire area within a lease or grant for the qualified project, excluding project easements, is considered the qualified project area.
#### § 57.4500 Heat sources.

Heat sources capable of producing combustion shall be separated from combustible materials if a fire hazard could be created.