alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016402EN.01003102.xml

| 31.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 September 2016 — LDC Argentina v Council

(Case T-118/14) (1)

1

((Dumping - Imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Normal value - Production costs))

(2016/C 402/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: LDC Argentina SA (Buenos Aires, Argentina) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, R. Luff and G. Bathory, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by S. Boelaert and B. Driessen, and subsequently by H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents, and by R. Bierwagen and C. Hipp, lawyers)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by M. França and A. Stobiecka-Kuik, acting as Agents) and European Biodiesel Board (EBB) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by O. Prost and M.-S. Dibling, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFUE for annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia (OJ 2013 L 315, p. 2) in so far as it imposes an anti-dumping duty on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Articles 1 and 2 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia, in so far as they concern LDC Argentina SA; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Articles 1 and 2 of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1194/2013 of 19 November 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of biodiesel originating in Argentina and Indonesia, in so far as they concern LDC Argentina SA;

| 2. | Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by LDC Argentina; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by LDC Argentina;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission and the European Biodiesel Board (EBB) to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission and the European Biodiesel Board (EBB) to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 151, 19.5.2014.

1

---
<PAGE>   1
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                    FORM 8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT

     PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

         Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): MAY 21, 1999


                               CORIXA CORPORATION
             (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

                                     0-22891
                            (Commission File Number)

DELAWARE                                   91-1654387
(State or other jurisdiction of            (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
incorporation)


                         1124 COLUMBIA STREET, SUITE 200
                            SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
             (Address of principal executive offices, with zip code)

                                 (206) 754-5711
              (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)


<PAGE>   2
ITEM 5. OTHER EVENTS.

                On May 24, 1999, Corixa Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the
        "Company") announced that on May 21, 1999 it had entered into a
        multi-year research collaboration and license agreement with Inpharzam
        International, S.A., a corporation organized and existing under the laws
        of Switzerland and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Zambon Group spa, a
        corporation organized and existing under the laws of Italy. Further
        details regarding this announcement are contained in the Company's press
        release dated May 24, 1999 attached as an exhibit hereto and
        incorporated by reference herein.

ITEM 7. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS.

        (c) Exhibits.

               Exhibit 99 Corixa Corporation Press Release dated May 24, 1999.


<PAGE>   3
                                   SIGNATURES


        Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.


                                  CORIXA CORPORATION



Date:  June 2, 1999           By:/S/ Michelle Burris
                                     -------------------------------------
                                     Michelle Burris
                                     Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


<PAGE>   4
                               CORIXA CORPORATION

                                INDEX TO EXHIBITS


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
EXHIBIT NUMBER                     DESCRIPTION                   SEQUENTIALLY PAGE NUMBER
--------------                     -----------                   ------------------------
<S>                     <C>                                      <C>
     99                 Press Release dated May 24, 1999

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**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 theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Ebix, Inc. (the “Company”) for the periodended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robin Raina, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1. The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and

 

2. The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| By:                      | /s/ Robin  Raina |   |
|--------------------------|------------------|--------|
|                     |             |
| Name:                    | Robin Raina      |   |
|                     |             |
| Chief  Executive Officer |             |
|                     |             |
| May 15, 2006             |             |
|                          |                  |        |  |

 

----
§ 582.2729 Hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate. ( a ) *Product.* Hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate (sodium calcium silicoaluminate).
( b ) *Tolerance.* This substance is generally recognized as safe for use at a level not exceeding 2 percent in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Swift Energy
Income  Partners  1986-D  Ltd.'s  balance  sheet  and  statement  of  operations
contained  in its Form 10-Q for the  quarter  ended  September  30,  1998 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         1,633
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  165,093
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               176,167
<PP&E>                                         12,809,959
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (11,252,160)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,734,312
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          38,384
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,590,356
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,734,312
<SALES>                                        199,083
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               205,118
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  676,667<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (539,466)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (539,466)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (539,466)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>Includes  lease  operating  expenses,  production  taxes  and  depreciation,
depletion and  amortization  expense.  Excludes general and  administrative  and
interest expense.
</FN>

        

</TABLE>
#### § 529.1044 Gentamicin in certain other dosage forms.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM MOSAIX, INC.
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10K.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           8,157
<SECURITIES>                                    20,072
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,124
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,621
<INVENTORY>                                        866
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                65,010
<PP&E>                                          30,342
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,602
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,325
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,936
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           108  
<OTHER-SE>                                      46,281
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,325
<SALES>                                         16,993
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                27,162
<CGS>                                            4,836
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,487
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,850
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    72
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,154
<INCOME-TAX>                                       431
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,723
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.16<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.16
<FN>
<F1>For purposes of this exhibit, Primary means Basic.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 872
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 872 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 872.3400 Karaya and sodium borate with or without acacia denture adhesive. ( a ) *Identification.* A karaya and sodium borate with or without acacia denture adhesive is a device composed of karaya and sodium borate with or without acacia intended to be applied to the base of a denture before the denture is inserted into patient's mouth to improve denture retention and comfort.
( b ) *Classification.* ( 1 ) Class I (general controls) if the device contains less than 12 percent by weight of sodium borate. The class I device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 872.9.
( 2 ) Class III if the device contains 12 percent or more by weight of sodium borate.
( c ) *Date PMA or notice of completion of a PDP is required.* A PMA or a notice of completion of a PDP is required to be filed with the Food and Drug Administration on or before December 26, 1996 for any karaya and sodium borate with or without acacia denture adhesive that was in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976, or that has, on or before December 26, 1996 been found to be substantially equivalent to a karaya and sodium borate with or without acacia denture adhesive that was in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976. Any other karaya and sodium borate with or without acacia denture adhesive shall have an approved PMA or a declared completed PDP in effect before being placed in commercial distribution.
[52 FR 30097, Aug. 12, 1987, as amended at 61 FR 50706, Sept. 27, 1996; 65 FR 2315, Jan. 14, 2000]
1 The Honorable Charles A. Shaw, UnitedStates District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-2857

___________ Despina Ghement, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. Washington University, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: October 6, 1999 Filed: October 12, 1999

___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Despina Ghement appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary ju dgment in her employment discrimination suit against her former employer, Washington University. After careful de novo review of the record and the parties’ submissions, we conclude the district court correctly granted summary judgment in Washington University’s favor. Accordingly, we dismiss Washington University’s motionto strike as moot. See Stewart v. Professional Computer Ctrs., Inc. , 148 F.3d-2-

937, 940 n.3 (8th Cir. 1998) (motion to strike dismissed as moot where challenged documents and sections of brief were not relied on in considering merits of appeal). As to Mrs. Ghement’s motion to strike, we find that it lacks merit because the documents she seeks to strike were in fact before the district court, and her request to supplement

the record is denied because she has offered no reason for the record being incomplete below. See Rivers-Frison v. Southeast Mo. Community Treatment Ctr. , 133 F.3d 616, 691 n.2 (8th Cir. 1998) (record on appeal consists only of evidence presented to district court). We also conclude a comprehensive opinion would lack precedential value. We thus affirm the district court’s ruling without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 99.1



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 Annual Report of Preferred Voice, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Mary G. Merritt, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



|                                           
|-------------------------------------------
|/s/    MARY G.
MERRITT                     
|Mary G. Merritt Principal Executive Officer



June
30, 2003
# C_2014184EN.01004601.xml

| 16.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 184/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 184/46

---

Action brought on 11 April 2014 — ZZ v ACER

(Case F-34/14)

2014/C 184/77

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER)

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision not to renew the applicant’s contractual agent contract and a claim of damages.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Director of ACER concerning the non-renewal of the applicant’s employment contract with ACER for the second time; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Director of ACER concerning the non-renewal of the applicant’s employment contract with ACER for the second time;

| — | order the defendant to pay an amount of 10.000 euros as damages for the moral harm that the applicant suffered; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay an amount of 10.000 euros as damages for the moral harm that the applicant suffered;

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6866

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JOHN ANTHONY FRILANDO, a/k/a Chino Frilando,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Florence. C. Weston Houck, Senior District

Judge. (CR-97-84, CA-99-2842-4)

Submitted: October 23, 2003 Decided: October 30, 2003

Before WILLIAMS, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Anthony Frilando, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker

Bethea, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

John Anthony Frilando seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.

Frilando cannot appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice

issues a certificate of appealability, and a certificate of

appealability will not issue absent a “substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).

A habeas appellant meets this standard by demonstrating that

reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are

debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the

district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v.

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, , 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1039 (2003); Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683

(4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and

conclude Frilando has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Rossiter v. Township of Abington

December 6, 1951.

*Frank R. Ambler,*for plaintiff.

*High, Swartz, Flynn & Roberts,*for defendant.

Forrest, J.,

On May 3, 1951, plaintiffs filed their complaint in trespass against defendant township, claiming damages for injuries sustained by Winona M. Rossiter, wife plaintiff, on October 27, 1950, alleging that she fell as a result of the poor condition of a highway, under the direction and control of defendant.

On October 29, 1951, defendant filed its preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer to the complaint, setting forth as the basis therefor, the fact that plaintiffs did not allege that notice of the injury had been given to the township within six months from the date thereof, in accordance with the Act of July 1, 1937, P. L. 2547, 53 PS §2774.

*572On October *2,*1951, plaintiffs filed their motion to dismiss defendant’s preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer, on the basis stated, as follows:

> “That defendant entered a general appearance and did not file any other pleading within 20 days after service of the complaint.” The record confirms those allegations.

Rule 1045 of the Supreme Court Rules of Civil Procedure, paragraphs *(a)*and *(b)*provide as follows:

> *“(a)*Within the time for filing an answer, a defendant in lieu thereof may enter a general appearance.

> (6) A party who fails to file a responsive pleading shall be deemed to admit all averments relating to the identity of the person by whom a material act was committed, the agency or employment of such person or the ownership, possession or control of the property or instrumentality involved. All other averments shall be deemed to be denied.”

In commenting on these rules, Goodrich-Amram Standard Pa. Practice, 202, states:

> “Since the appearance qualifies as an answer to the merits, its filing has the identical effect. It constitutes a general appearance, and prevents the defendant from subsequently raising any question of jurisdiction over his person. It constitutes an answer to the merits and therefore prevents the defendant from subsequently filing any preliminary objection.”

Accordingly, defendant having entered a general appearance, he is precluded from now entering a preliminary objection and therefore, the preliminary objection should be stricken.

And now, December 6, 1951, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer is sustained. The motion is granted and defendant’s preliminary objection is stricken.