alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016048EN.01003101.xml

| 8.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 48/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2015 — Japan Airlines v Commission

(Case T-36/11) (1)

1

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - European airfreight market - Agreements and concerted practices in respect of several elements of the pricing of airfreight services (imposition of fuel and security surcharges, refusal to pay commission on surcharges) - Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and Switzerland on Air Transport - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 048/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Japan Airlines Co. Ltd, formerly Japan Airlines International Co. Ltd (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: J.-F. Bellis, K. Van Hove, lawyers, and R. Burton, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by N. von Lingen and S. Noë, subsequently by S. Noë, and J. Bourke, and finally by A. Dawes, acting as Agents, and by J. Holmes, Barrister)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight) and, in the alternative, for a reduction in the fine imposed on the applicant and on Japan Airlines Corp.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as it concerns Japan Airlines Co. Ltd and Japan Airlines Corp.; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Decision C(2010) 7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport (Case COMP/39258 — Airfreight), in so far as it concerns Japan Airlines Co. Ltd and Japan Airlines Corp.;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Japan Airlines Co. Ltd.

---

(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.

1

---
Straits of Florida Planning Area

Undiscovered Technically Recoverable 

Resources by Water Depth Range

25 mi

50 mi

200 m

800 m

September, 2008

Note:

Resource numbers in the 

Atlantic area are estimates 

based on1970s-1980s seismic 

data and limited exploratory 

wells. The numbers for these 

bands in the Atlantic area, while 

based on the best available 

data, are highly speculative.

FL

Water Depth Gas (Tcf) UTRR Oil (Bbbl) UTRR

 0-200 meters 0.00 - 0.01 0.00 - 0.02

 200-800 meters 0.00 - 0.01 0.00 - 0.01

 800-1600 meters Negligible Negligible

 1600-2400 meters Negligible Negligible

 >2400 meters Negligible Negligible

Resource Estimates Based on MMS 2006 Assessment Data

Resource values are in trillion cubic feet of gas (Tcf)

and billion barrels of oil (Bbbl).

25 mi50 mi

Cuba

Bahamas

Bahamas
# C_2012013EN.01000201.xml

| 14.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 13/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/2

---

Appeal lodged on 24 May 2011 by Massimo Campailla against the order of the General Court (Third Chamber) delivered on 14 March 2011 in Case T-429/09 Campailla v European Commission

(Case C-265/11 P)

2012/C 13/02

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Massimo Campailla (represented by: M. Campailla)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

By order of 6 October 2011, the Court (Fifth Chamber) declared the appeal inadmissible.

---
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal, District Judge for the U.S. District

Court for Southern Texas, Houston, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RANA MUHAMMAD MASOOD,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-72633

Agency No. A097-620-974

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted May 13, 2011

San Francisco, California

Before: B. FLETCHER and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and ROSENTHAL,

District Judge.** 

Rana Muhammad Masood (“Masood”) petitions for review of an order of

the Board of Immigration Appeals denying his application for asylum, withholding

of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have

FILED

MAY 20 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition. Because the

parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of the petition, we need

not recount it here.

The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) supported her adverse credibility

determination with “specific” and “cogent” reasons going to the “heart” of

Masood’s claims. Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959, 962 (9th Cir. 2004). For example,

the IJ noted inconsistencies in Masood’s testimony about his political activities and

knowledge: Masood twice changed his testimony about the year he became an area

president; neither the constituency he claimed to have voted in, nor the candidate

he claimed to have voted for, appeared in the October 2002 election results; and, in

his asylum interview, Masood misidentified common abbreviations in Pakistani

politics. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s findings, which go to the heart of

Masood’s claims. See Singh v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1139, 1143 (9th Cir. 2004)

(noting that petitioner’s lack of political knowledge and incorrect statements

supported an adverse credibility finding); Wang v. INS, 352 F.3d 1250, 1259 (9th

Cir. 2003) (“So long as one of the identified grounds is supported by substantial

evidence and goes to the heart of [petitioner’s] claim of persecution, we are bound

to accept the IJ’s adverse credibility finding.”).
3

The remaining record evidence would not compel any reasonable factfinder

to find that Masood established his eligibility for relief. See Singh, 367 F.3d at

1143. 

PETITION DENIED.
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 the Annual Report of Loral Space & Communications Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Michael B. Targoff, 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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ MICHAEL B. TARGOFFMichael B. TargoffChief Executive Officer


February 28, 2012
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Michigan Community Bancorp Limited,
(the "Corporation") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Janet C. Smith, Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

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

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



/s/      Janet C. Smith
----------------------------------------------
         Janet C. Smith
         Chief Financial Officer
         November 13, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             383
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    854,353
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               938,236
<PP&E>                                         104,686
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,228,737
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,686,540
<BONDS>                                        904,280
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,270
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,368,353)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,228,737
<SALES>                                         85,894
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                85,894
<CGS>                                          366,495
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  366,495
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,667,719
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             537,865
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,434,986)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (5,434,986)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  26,830
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,408,156)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.06)


</TABLE>
# C_2013252EN.01004901.xml

| 31.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/49

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 30 May 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case F-102/11) (1)

1

(Civil service - Article 34(1) and (6) of the Rules of Procedure - Application lodged by fax within the time-limit for bringing proceedings - Handwritten signature on the fax different from that on the original application received by post - Action lodged out of time - Manifestly inadmissible)

2013/C 252/87

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser, J. Banquero Cruz, Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s implied decision refusing to pay to the applicant annual travelling expenses from the place of his employment to his place of origin for the period 2005 to 2010.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | Mr Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 126, 28.4.2012, p. 27.

1

---
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 the
quarterly report of ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, Uli
Hacksell, Ph.D., Chief 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 to the best of my knowledge, that:

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

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the Report and results of operations of the Company for the period covered by the Report.



|                       |  |  |  |                        
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 9, 2009 |  |  |  | /S/ ULI HACKSELL       
|                       |  |  |  | Uli Hacksell, Ph.D.    
|                       |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer

This certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing
under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Cancer Institute Initial Review Group, Subcommittee G—Education.                    

*Date:*                         February 6-7, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Washington Court Hotel, 525 New Jersey Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20001.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Sonya Roberson, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Resources and Training Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 6116 Executive Blvd., Room 8109, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-1182,                         *robersos@mail.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: January 9, 2007.

Anna Snouffer,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-178 Filed 1-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
# C_2011238EN.01001201.xml

| 13.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 238/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 238/12

---

Appeal brought on 14 June 2011 by XXXLutz Marken GmbH against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 24 March 2011 in Case T-54/09 XXXLutz Marken GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and Natura Selection S.L.

(Case C-306/11 P)

2011/C 238/17

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: XXXLutz Marken GmbH (represented by: H. Pannen, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings:

Other parties to the proceedings:

| — | Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) |
| --- | --- |

—

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

| — | Natura Selection S.L. |
| --- | --- |

—

Natura Selection S.L.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Set aside the judgment under appeal; |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside the judgment under appeal;

| — | Refer the case back to the General Court; |
| --- | --- |

—

Refer the case back to the General Court;

| — | Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The General Court infringed Article 8(1)(b) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation (1) by concluding that the signs ‘Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil’ and ‘natura selection’ were similar purely on the basis that both signs contained the word element ‘natura’. That word element is not, however, the dominant element of the earlier trade mark.

1

In its assessment of the similarity of the signs, the General Court started from a legally incorrect understanding of the concepts of ‘distinctive character’ and ‘descriptive character’.

Furthermore, the conclusions of the General Court concerning the similarity of the signs are contradictory and demonstrate in that regard a failure to state reasons.

In the judgment under appeal the General Court also proceeded on the basis of a distortion of the facts. Contrary to the findings of the General Court, the appellant has already demonstrated, in the proceedings before the Opposition Division and the Board of Appeal, that there is a connection between the goods at issue and the word element ‘natura’.

---

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

1

---
# CE2009286EN.01010301.xml

| 27.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 286/103 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 286/103

---

Wednesday 18 June 2008New allocation of the responsibilities of Vice-President Jacques Barrot

P6_TA(2008)0290

European Parliament decision of 18 June 2008 approving the new allocation of the responsibilities of Vice-President of the Commission Jacques Barrot

2009/C 286 E/40

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to Article 217(2) of the EC Treaty,

having regard to point 5 of the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission (1),

1

having regard to the proposal of 9 May 2008 to change the allocation of the responsibilities of Vice-President of the Commission Jacques Barrot,

having regard to the hearing of the Vice-President before its committee responsible on 16 June 2008,

having regard to Rule 99 of its Rules of Procedure,

| 1. | Approves the new allocation of the responsibilities of Vice-President Jacques Barrot for the remainder of the Commission's term of office until 31 October 2009; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the new allocation of the responsibilities of Vice-President Jacques Barrot for the remainder of the Commission's term of office until 31 October 2009;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.

---

(1)  OJ C 117 E, 18.5.2006, p. 123.

1

---