alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014361EN.01002001.xml

| 13.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 361/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 361/20

---

Action brought on 11 August 2014 — Syriatel Mobile Telecom v Council

(Case T-600/14)

2014/C 361/29

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Syriatel Mobile Telecom (Joint Stock Company) (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: E. Ruchat and C. Cornet d’Elzius, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare its action to be both admissible and well founded; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare its action to be both admissible and well founded;

| — | consequently, order the European Union to pay full compensation for the damage suffered by the applicant, in the amount of EUR 48 8 8 29  000; |
| --- | --- |

—

consequently, order the European Union to pay full compensation for the damage suffered by the applicant, in the amount of EUR 48 8 8 29  000;

| — | in the alternative, order the appointment of an expert to establish the extent of the damage suffered by the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, order the appointment of an expert to establish the extent of the damage suffered by the applicant;

| — | order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council of the European Union to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law which are essentially identical or similar to those raised in Case T-592/14 Makhlouf v Council.

Makhlouf

Council

---
-1-

S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N

C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

UNPUBLISHED

June 19, 2018

v No. 337572

Roscommon Circuit Court

WILLIAM FRANK SIKORSKI JR., LC No. 12-006736-FC

Defendant-Appellant.

Before: MURPHY, P.J., and JANSEN and SWARTZLE, JJ.

JANSEN, J. (dissenting)

Because I agree with defendant that the Crosby1 remand procedure was improper, and 

because, in my view, defense counsel admits he provided ineffective assistance of counsel, I 

respectfully dissent. 

In People v Lockridge, our Supreme Court articulated, at length, the proper procedure 

when conducting a Crosby hearing on remand. See Lockridge, 498 Mich at 398. Due process 

requires the trial court to allow defendant an opportunity to inform the court whether or not he 

will seek resentencing. Id. It is undisputed, and even admitted by defense counsel, that this did 

not happen here. Indeed, defense counsel admits that he did not consult with defendant prior to 

the Crosby hearing, and further, defendant was not even present for the hearing. Defense 

counsel was appointed to represent defendant in all post-conviction proceedings. A Crosby 

hearing is a post-conviction proceeding, and no substitution of counsel had occurred. 

Accordingly, in my view, the trial court in this matter has not fulfilled the duty it owes to 

defendant to protect defendant’s right to due process of law. Given the cumulative errors that 

took place in this matter, I disagree with the majority that “any error with respect to defendant’s 

opportunity to avoid resentencing” is harmless. I would again remand to the trial court for 

defendant to receive effective assistance of counsel relating to a properly conducted Crosby

hearing. 

/s/ Kathleen Jansen

 1 United States v Crosby, 397 F3d 103 (CA 2, 2005).
Editorial Note on Part 886
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 886 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 886.5844 Prescription spectacle lens. ( a ) *Identification.* A prescription spectacle lens is a glass or plastic device that is a lens intended to be worn by a patient in a spectacle frame to provide refractive corrections in accordance with a prescription for the patient. The device may be modified to protect the eyes from bright sunlight (i.e., prescription sunglasses). Prescription sunglass lenses may be reflective, tinted, polarizing, or photosensitized.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 886.9.
[52 FR 33355, Sept. 2, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 35607, Sept. 14, 1988; 59 FR 63014, Dec. 7, 1994; 66 FR 38814, July 25, 2001]
Editorial Note on Part 892
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 892 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 892.1920 Radiographic head holder. ( a ) *Identification.* A radiographic head holder is a device intended to position the patient's head during a radiographic procedure.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter, subject to the limitations in § 892.9. The device is also exempt from the current good manufacturing practice requirements of the quality system regulation in part 820 of this chapter, with the exception of § 820.180, with respect to general requirements concerning records, and § 820.198, with respect to complaint files.
[53 FR 1567, Jan. 20, 1988, as amended at 66 FR 38819, July 25, 2001]
Editorial Note on Part 886
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 886 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 886.4750 Ophthalmic eye shield. ( a ) *Identification.* An ophthalmic eye shield is a device that consists of a plastic or aluminum eye covering intended to protect the eye or retain dressing materials in place.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). When made only of plastic or aluminum, the device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 886.9. When made only of plastic or aluminum, the devices are exempt from the current good manufacturing practice requirements of the quality system regulation in part 820 of this chapter, with the exception of § 820.180 of this chapter, with respect to general requirements concerning records, and § 820.198 of this chapter, with respect to complaint files.
[52 FR 33355, Sept. 2, 1987, as amended at 59 FR 63014, Dec. 7, 1994; 65 FR 2321, Jan. 14, 2000]
# C_2017022EN.01002201.xml

| 23.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 30 November 2016 — Export Development Bank of Iran v Council

(Case T-89/14) (1)

1

((Common Foreign and Security Policy - Restrictive measures against Iran - Freezing of funds - Further listing of the applicant after annulment of the initial listing by the General Court - Error in law - Error in fact - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Right to effective judicial protection - Proportionality - Equal treatment))

(2017/C 022/28)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Export Development Bank of Iran (Teheran, Iran) (represented by: J.-M. Thouvenin, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: V. Piessevaux and M. Bishop, agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Aresu and D. Gauci, agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking, principally, annulment of Council Decision 2013/661/CFSP of 15 November 2013 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2010 L 306, p. 18), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1154/2013 of 15 November 2013, implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2013 L 306, p. 3), in so far as those acts concern the applicant, and, in the alternative, annulment of Decision 2013/661 and of Implementing Regulation No 1154/2013 in so far as those acts concern the applicant as from 20 January 2014.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Export Development Bank of Iran to pay, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Export Development Bank of Iran to pay, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 135, 5.5.2014.

1

---
ANDES 7 Inc.

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 ofANDES 7 Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the Report), I, Andrew Khor Poh Kiang, Principal  Executive  Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

  

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

  

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

  

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to Andrew Khor Poh Kiang and will be retained by ANDES 7 Inc. and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

  

 

Dated: April 11, 2018

 

 

By: /s/ Andrew Khor Poh Kiang

Andrew Khor Poh Kiang

President, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman

(Principal Executive Officer)

 

 

ANDES 7 Inc.

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 ofANDES 7 Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2016 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the Report), I, Lee Kok Keing, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify,  pursuant to18 U.S.C.  ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

  

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to Lee Kok Keing, and will be retained by ANDES 7 Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

  

 

Dated: April 11, 2018

 

 

By: /s/ Lee Kok Keing

Lee Kok Keing

Chief Financial Officer 

(Principal Financial Officer)
§ 1.1398-3 Treatment of section 121 exclusion in individuals' title 11 cases. ( a ) *Scope.* This section applies to cases under chapter 7 or chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code, but only if the debtor is an individual.
( b ) *Definition and rules of general application.* For purposes of this section, section 121 exclusion means the exclusion of gain from the sale or exchange of a debtor's principal residence available under section 121.
( c ) *Estate succeeds to exclusion upon commencement of case.* The bankruptcy estate succeeds to and takes into account the section 121 exclusion with respect to the property transferred into the estate.
( d ) *Effective date.* This section is applicable for sales or exchanges on or after December 24, 2002.
[67 FR 78367, Dec. 24, 2002]
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

MEMORANDUM 

DATE: June 24, 2014 

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

SUBJECT: Thiabendazole and Salts: Health Effects Division's Response to Comments on 

the Thiabendazole Preliminary Work Plan (PWP) for Registration Review 

PC Code: 060101 (thiabendazole); 

0601 02 (thiabendazole hypophosphite) 

Decision No.: 491835 

Petition No.: NIA 

Risk Assessment Type: N/ A 

TXRNo.:N/A 

MRID No.: N/A 

FROM: Jessica Kidwell, Risk Assessor 

DP Barcode: 420713 

Registration No.: N/A 

Regulatory Action: Registration Review 

Case No.: 2670 

CAS No.: 148-79-8 (thiabendazole); 

28558-32-9 (thiabendazole hypophosphite) 

40 CFR: §180.242 

. j#f_ Sue Hummel, Chemist . 

~tr' Bonnie Cropp-Kohlligian, Dietary o ure 

RAB IV, Health Effects Division (HED) (7509P) 

c/J IL? 

THROUGH: Elissa 

RAB IV, 

Reaves, 

Health 

Ph.D., 

Effects 

Branch 

Division 

Chief 

(HED) (7509P) 

~~ 

TO: Ricardo Jones, RM51 

Thomas Moriarty 

RMIBI, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P) 

Two public comments were received on the thiabendazole PWP which are pertinent to HED 

concerns. Both pertained to international harmonization. 

Comments: Syngenta requested that the tolerance expression for thiabendazole be changed to 

parent only to harmonize internationally. They did not suggest tolerance levels for 

harmonization. The Northwest Horticultural Council expressed interest in continuing the 

registration for thiabendazole on pome fruit, and tabulated the MRLs on apples and pears 

internationally. They requested that the tolerance be harmonized, but did not suggest a level. 

Page 1 of2 
HED Response: HED thanks the two commenters for their input. International harmonization, 

including both-tolerance expressions and tolerance levels, are always a consideration in 

registration review. The Agency will be updating and harmonizing the tolerance expression and 

the tolerance levels internationally. The comments will prove useful in that effort. 

Page 2 of2
# C_2014303EN.01005202.xml

| 8.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/52

---

Action brought on 15 July 2014 — Information Resources v OHIM (Growth Delivered)

(Case T-528/14)

2014/C 303/62

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Information Resources, Inc. (Chicago, United States) (represented by: C. Schulte, 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 Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 May 2014 given in Case R 1777/2013-4; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 May 2014 given in Case R 1777/2013-4;

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

—

Order the defendant to bear the costs of proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘Growth Delivered’ for services in Classes 35, 41 and 42

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: Refused the application for registration

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) CTMR.

Pleas in law:

---
Editorial Note on Part 878
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 878 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 878.4790 Powered surgical instrument for improvement in the appearance of cellulite. ( a ) *Identification.* A powered surgical instrument for improvement in the appearance of cellulite is a prescription device that is used for the controlled release of subcutaneous tissue for improvement in the appearance of cellulite. The device consists of a cutting tool powered by a motor and a means for instrument guidance to control the areas of subcutaneous tissue cutting underneath the cellulite depressions or dimples.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are: ( 1 ) Non-clinical testing must be performed to demonstrate that the device meets all design specifications and performance requirements, and to demonstrate durability and mechanical integrity of the device.
( 2 ) In vivo evaluation of the device must demonstrate device performance, including the safety of the release methodology and blood loss at the treatment sites.
( 3 ) All elements of the device that may contact the patient must be demonstrated to be biocompatible.
( 4 ) Electrical safety and electromagnetic compatibility of the device must be demonstrated.
( 5 ) The labeling must include a summary of in vivo evaluation data and all the device specific warnings, precautions, and/or contraindications.
( 6 ) Sterility and shelf-life testing for the device must demonstrate the sterility of patient contacting components and the shelf life of these components.
[79 FR 31861, June 3, 2014]
### Larry Greene

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFICER

777 12 th Street, 3 rd Floor * Sacramento, CA 95814-1908 916/874-4800 * 916/874-4899 fax www.airquality.org December 17, 2010

Mr. Michael Guzzetta Stationary Source Division California Air Resources Board PO Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812

Subject: State Implementation Plan Revision, SMAQMD Rule 449

Dear Mr. Guzzetta:

Enclosed is the information necessary for submittal of Rule 449, Transfer of Gasoline into Vehicle Fuel Tanks, for revision to the State Implementation Plan. Rule 449 was amended by the District’s Board of Directors on February 26, 2009. Please also forward the information for this submittal to U.S. EPA.

If you have any comments or questions, please contact me at (916) 874-4851.

Sincerely,

Kevin J. Williams, Ph.D. Program Coordinator (sent via e-mail)

Attachments:

1. SIP Checklist Rule 449 2. Final Version of Rule 449 3. Underline/Strikeout Version of Rule 449 4. Public Notice Evidence 5. Resolution 6. Public Comments 7. Rule Evaluation Form 8. Board Memo 

### 9. Staff Report (includes responses to comments)
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Carmine T. Oliva, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this amendment no. 1 to Form 10-Q of MicroTel
     International, Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
     a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
     statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
     were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
     report; and

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this report, fairly present in all material
     respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
     the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

Date: November 11, 2003

/s/ CARMINE T. OLIVA
-----------------------------------------------------
Carmine T. Oliva
Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)

<PAGE>

I, Randolph D. Foote, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this amendment no. 1 to Form 10-Q of MicroTel
     International, Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
     a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
     statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
     were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
     report; and

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this report, fairly present in all material
     respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
     the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

Date: November 11, 2003

/s RANDOLPH D. FOOTE
-----------------------------------------------------
Randolph D. Foote
Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer)
Editorial Note on Part 880
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 880 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 880.6860 Ethylene oxide gas sterilizer. ( a ) *Identification.* An ethylene gas sterilizer is a nonportable device intended for use by a health care provider that uses ethylene oxide (ETO) to sterilize medical products.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (performance standards).
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > President's Special Message on Balance of Payments

              																	United States. President (1961-1963 : Kennedy)					 and 	Eighty-Eighth Congress, 1963-1965. 						*President's Special Message on Balance of Payments : Along with H.R. 8000, and Description and Technical Explanation of H.R. 8000, the "Interest Equalization Tax Act of 1963"*,												Washington: 								U.S. Government Printing Office, 										1963,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/1223,			accessed on September 22, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
Editorial Note on Part 862
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 862 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 862.3300 Digitoxin test system. ( a ) *Identification.* A digitoxin test system is a device intended to measure digitoxin, a cardiovascular drug, in serum and plasma. Measurements obtained by this device are used in the diagnosis and treatment of digitoxin overdose and in monitoring levels of digitoxin to ensure appropriate therapy.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II.