alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016098EN.01004201.xml

| 14.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/42

---

Judgment of the General Court of 28 January 2016 — Novomatic v OHIM — Simba Toys (African SIMBA)

(Case T-687/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark African SIMBA - Prior national figurative mark Simba - Duty to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 098/54)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Novomatic AG (Gumpoldskirchen, Austria) (represented by: W. Mosing, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Schifko, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court: Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG (Fürth, Germany) (represented by: O. Ruhl, lawyer)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 July 2014 (Case R 2098/2013-4) concerning opposition proceedings between Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG and Novomatic AG.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Novomatic AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Novomatic AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 409, 17.11.2014.

1

---
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Richard J.Baum, certify that:

 

1. I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Ebix, Inc.;

 

2. Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

(a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

(b) Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date:  | November 11, 2005  | /s/ Richard J. Baum |   |
|--------|-------------------------|---------------------|--------|
|   | Richard J. Baum         |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
EXHIBIT 32.2SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION     I, Edward P. Smolyansky, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Lifeway Foods, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB/A for three month period ended March 31, 2006:     (1) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and     (2) that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.     This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as anexhibit to such Form 10-QSB. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.Date:May 14, 2007       /s/ Edward P. Smolyansky         Chief Financial and Accounting Officerand Treasurer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1999
<CASH>                                           2,470
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,364
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    261,484
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           8,833
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 317,320
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,500
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   317,320
<SALES>                                         61,974
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                61,974
<CGS>                                           50,670
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,220
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,501
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,146
<INCOME-TAX>                                       326
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       820
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 3.5


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                       TO THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                           OF PREFERRED/TELECOM, INC.

         Preferred/telecom, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and
by  virtue  of the  General  Corporation  Law  of the  State  of  Delaware  (the
"Corporation"), does hereby certify:

         FIRST:  ARTICLE FIRST of the Certificate of Incorporation is amended by
changing the name of the Corporation to Preferred Voice, Inc."

         Accordingly,  ARTICLE  FIRST of the  Certificate  of  Incorporation  as
amended is deleted and the  following  new ARTICLE  FIRST is  submitted  in lieu
thereof:

                                 "ARTICLE FIRST

         The  name  of   the   Corporation  is   Preferred   Voice,  Inc.   (the
"Corporation")."

         SECOND:  That upon  effectiveness  of this Certificate of Amendment (i)
each two shares of Common Stock,  par value $0.001 per share of the Corporation,
previously  issued and  outstanding or held in treasury at the effective time of
this Certificate of Amendment shall be deemed to have been reclassified into and
exchanged for one (1) new share of  outstanding  Common Share,  par value $0.001
per share, of the Corporation; and (ii) fractional shares shall be rounded up to
the nearest whole share.

         THIRD:  That the  Certificate  of  Amendment  has been  approved by the
Corporation  pursuant to a resolution of its Board of Directors and a consent in
writing  signed by the  holders  of in excess of a majority  of the  outstanding
shares of Common Stock, par value $.001 per share, of the Corporation, which was
not less than the minimum number of votes necessary to authorize the Certificate
of Amendment at a meeting at which all  stockholders of the  Corporation  having
the right to vote  thereon were  present and voted,  and written  notice of such
action has been sent to all other stockholders who have not consented in writing
to such action.

         FOURTH:   That  the  Certificate  of  Amendment  was  duly  adopted  in
accordance  with the  provisions  of Section  228 and Section 242 of the General
Corporation Laws of the State of Delaware.

         FIFTH:  That the  Certificate of Amendment  shall become  effective  at
5:00 p.m. (EST) on the date this Certificate of Amendment is duly filed with the
Secretary of State of the State of Delaware.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF this  Certificate of Amendment has been executed for
Preferred/telecom,  Inc., by Dennis Lee Gundy,  its  President,  this 5th day of
March, 1997.

                                             /s/ Dennis Lee Gundy
                                             -----------------------------------
                                               Dennis Lee Gundy, President
# C_2019413EN.01003801.xml

| 9.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 413/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 413/38

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 September 2019 — Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings v Commission

(Case T-586/14 RENV) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of solar glass originating in China - Article 2(7)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (now Article 2(7)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036) - Market economy treatment - Concept of ‘significant distortion in the production costs and financial situation of firms’ - Tax incentives - Manifest error of assessment)

(2019/C 413/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd (Anhui, China) (represented by: Y. Melin, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Interverner in support of the defendant: GMB Glasmanufaktur Brandenburg GmbH (Tschernitz, Germany) (represented by: R. MacLean, Solicitor)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 470/2014 of 13 May 2014 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of solar glass originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2014 L 142, p. 1; corrigendum OJ 2014 L 253, p. 4).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 470/2014 of 13 May 2014 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of solar glass originating in the People’s Republic of China; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 470/2014 of 13 May 2014 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of solar glass originating in the People’s Republic of China;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd, with the exception of those relating to the intervention; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd, with the exception of those relating to the intervention;

| 3. | Orders GMB Glasmanufaktur Brandenburg GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings relating to its intervention. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders GMB Glasmanufaktur Brandenburg GmbH to bear its own costs and to pay the costs of Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings relating to its intervention.

---

(1)  OJ C 372, 20.10.2014.

---
38622.

#### ED SMITH & SONS, INC. v. MATHIS *et al.*

Decided November 9, 1961.

*Smith, Kilpatrick, Cody, Rogers de McClatchey, Ernest P. Rogers, Barry Phillips, Wm. W. Cowan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Calhoun de Calhoun, Walter W. Calhoun, Bryan, Carter, Ansley*.efe *Smith, W. Colquitt Carter, Charles H. Hyatt,*contra.

Per Curiam.

The judgment of this court in *Ed Smith & Sons, Inc. v. Mathis,*103 Ga. App. 661 (120 SE2d 646), having been reversed by the Supreme Court of Georgia in *Ed Smith & Sons, Inc. v. Mathis,*217 Ga. 354 (122 SE2d 97), the judgment of this court is vacated, and the judgment of the Supreme Court is made the judgment of this court.

*The judgment of the trial court is reversed.*

*All the Judges concur, except Custer, J., who did not participate in the original decision.*
§ 556.170 Decoquinate. ( a ) *Acceptable daily intake (ADI).* The ADI for total residue of decoquinate is 75 μg/kg of body weight per day.
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for decoquinate are: ( 1 ) *Cattle.* ( i ) Muscle: 1 ppm.
( ii ) Other edible tissues (excluding milk): 2 ppm.
( 2 ) *Chickens.* ( i ) Muscle: 1 ppm.
( ii ) Other edible tissues (excluding eggs): 2 ppm.
( 3 ) *Goats.* ( i ) Muscle: 1 ppm.
( ii ) Other edible tissues (excluding milk): 2 ppm.
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See §§ 520.534 and 558.195 of this chapter.
[84 FR 32993, July 11, 2019, as amended at 86 FR 13188, Mar. 8, 2021]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  (25)
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    (25)
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,369,810
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        45,996
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,611,897)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      (25)
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   31,941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                70,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,994
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                               (115,935)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (115,935)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.00)


</TABLE>
#### In re Edwardsville Borough Auditors’ Report

*Collins & Collins,*for petitioner.

*Benjamin R. Jones, Jr.,*and *John E. Morris, Jr.,*for respondents.

September 5, 1951.

Valentine, P. J.,

— In April 1950 a taxpayer of Edwardsville Borough filed an appeal from the report of the borough auditors for the year 1949.

On appellant’s application an order was made impounding certain records of the borough. In due course testimony was taken and a final decree, surcharging certain officials, was entered on April 13, 1951. The amount of the surcharge was duly paid in May 1951.

On August 31, 1951, upon the ex parte application of appellant taxpayer, an order was made directing *286that the payroll records of the street commissioner of the borough, for the year 1949, be impounded by the sheriff. This order was sought upon the contention that an examination of such records might reveal a basis for the institution of criminal proceedings.

The court has no inherent power to direct the impounding of the records of a municipality. Such right can only be exercised as incidental to some pending proceeding in which the records may be needed for evidence. The appeal taken in the present case was fully and finally disposed of five months before the order asking for the impounding of the payroll records was sought. There is now no pending proceeding. If the district attorney desires the payroll records as a possible basis for a criminal proceeding he may procure the same. The ex parte order of August 31,1951, was improvidently made.

Therefore, the rule of September 5, 1951, to revoke this order, is made absolute.
### Letters (51-75) received in support ofthe SkyWest proposal for DOT-OST-2009-0300 Alpena, MlAir Service ' For complete letter/communicationscontactJackie Krawczak attheAlpena Area Chamber of:;: Commerce. 989.354.4181. An 

## * indicatesthefull text has been forwarded tothe DOT. 

### Business name 51. Lahti Search Consultants 52. Lahti Search Consultants 53. Alpena County Library 54. citizens ofMN; frequentAlpena visitors 55. citizen 56. Safari Club of NE Michigan *57.Alpena County Regional Airport *58. Neiman's Family Market 59. R.A. Townsend 60. Regional Elite 61. citizen/ACC trustee 62. citizen 63. citizen 64. Afghanistan Agricultural Ext. Project 65. Alpena Area Convention and Visitor's Bureau 66. citizen/property owner 67. Thunder Bay Transportation Authority 68. Viking Marine 69. Alpena Power Company 70. Ameri-Shred 71. Law Office ofWhite, Clark, Mock 

### Signed by 

# ·o r<; Teresa Lahti, Presideht 0 Richard Cook, Managing Dir. Eric Magness-Eubank The Larson Family Dale Adrian Dr. Michael Wilmot Billi McRoberts Hal Neiman Tom Townsend Shane Smolinski Florence Stibitz Nancy Hammond Doris Kaiser David Glenn Deb Pardike Craig Patterson Billi Edmonds John Unkovich Kevin Brown Steve ldalski Daniel White :'

/72. citizens 73. Besser Company 74. citizen 75. citizen/local CPA Gordon and Vernie Nethercut Jim Park Grace Campbell David Blumenthal, CPA
Editorial Note on Part 862
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 862 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 862.3150 Barbiturate test system. ( a ) *Identification.* A barbiturate test system is a device intended to measure barbiturates, a class of hypnotic and sedative drugs, in serum, urine, and gastric contents. Measurements obtained by this device are used in the diagnosis and treatment of barbiturate use or overdose and in monitoring levels of barbiturate to ensure appropriate therapy.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). A barbiturate test system is not exempt if it is intended for any use other than employment or insurance testing or is intended for Federal drug testing programs. The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 862.9, provided the test system is intended for employment and insurance testing and includes a statement in the labeling that the device is intended solely for use in employment and insurance testing, and does not include devices intended for Federal drug testing programs (*e.g.,* programs run by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the U.S. military).
[52 FR 16122, May 1, 1987, as amended at 84 FR 71797, Dec. 30, 2019]
# C_2014175EN.01005101.xml

| 10.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 175/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/51

---

Action brought on 10 April 2014 — Deluxe Laboratories v OHIM (deluxe)

(Case T-222/14)

2014/C 175/70

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Deluxe Laboratories, Inc (Burbank, United States) (represented by: S. Serrat Viñas, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 22 January 2014 in Case R 1250/2013-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 22 January 2014 in Case R 1250/2013-2;

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark with word element ‘deluxe’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42 and 45 — Community trade mark application No 11 253 044

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: Registration refused

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

Pleas in law:

| — | Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(3) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of the principles of then protection of legitimate expectations, acquired rights and the lawfulness of Community measures |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of the principles of then protection of legitimate expectations, acquired rights and the lawfulness of Community measures

---