alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2012194EN.01002002.xml

| 30.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 May 2012 — Ewald v OHIM — Kin Cosmetics (Keen)

(Case T-280/11) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark Keen - Community figurative mark KIN - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2012/C 194/33

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Rita Ewald (Frauenwald, Germany) (represented by: S. Reinhardt, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Kin Cosmetics, S.A. (Sant Feliu de Guixols, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 March 2011 (Case R 1383/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Kin Cosmetics, S.A. and Ms Rita Ewald

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders Ms Rita Ewald to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders Ms Rita Ewald to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 238, 13.8.2011.

1

---
**Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 April 2011 – Sfichi and Ilaş v Direcţia Generală a Finanţelor Publice Suceava and
Others**

**(Joined Cases C-29/11 and C-30/11)**

First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure – Internal taxation – Article 110 TFEU – Pollution tax levied upon first registration of motor vehicles

Tax provisions – Internal taxation – Pollution tax imposed on motor vehicles on their first registration in national territory (Art. 110 TFEU) (see paras 23-26,
operative part)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | Reference for a preliminary ruling – Tribunalul Suceava – Registration of second-hand motor vehicles previously registered in other Member States – National legislation making the first registration of such motor vehicles conditional upon payment of an environmental tax, whereas second-hand motor vehicles already present on the national market are exempt from payment of that tax on the occasion of re-registration – Whether the national legislation is compatible with the first and second paragraphs of Article 110 TFEU – Obstacle to the free movement of goods. |

**Operative part**

Article 110 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding a Member State from introducing a pollution tax affecting motor vehicles
on their first registration in that Member State, if that fiscal measure is so designed as to discourage the putting into
service, in that Member State, of second-hand vehicles bought in other Member States, without, however, discouraging the purchase
of second-hand vehicles of the same age and condition on the national market.
###### Editorial Note on Part 154

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 154 appear part 154 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50466, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, Oct. 1, 2012.

#### § 154.436 Design vapor pressure.

The Po of a semi-membrane tank must not exceed 24.5 kPa gauge (3.55 psig) unless special approval by the Commandant (CG-ENG) allows a Po between 24.5 kPa gauge (3.55 psig) and 69 kPa gauge (10 psig).

[CGD 74-289, 44 FR 26009, May 3, 1979, as amended by CGD 82-063b, 48 FR 4782, Feb. 3, 1983]
# C_2012039EN.01002102.xml

| 11.2.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.2.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/21

---

Order of the General Court of 15 December 2011 — Westfälisch-Lippischer Sparkassen- und Giroverband v Commission

(Case T-22/11) (1)

(2012/C 39/41)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 72, 5.3.2011.

---
|Exhibit 32.1
|------------



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

The undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of Belcrest Capital Fund LLC (the Fund), that based on his knowledge:

|(a) | the Quarterly Report of the Fund on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   
|(b) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the Fund for such period.                                        
|   



|Date: May 10, 2006
|------------------



| | /s/ Thomas E. Faust Jr.Thomas E. Faust Jr.Chief Executive Officer
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
5:14-cr-20804-JCO-DRG Doc # 3 Filed 09/24/14 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 11
5:14-cr-20804-JCO-DRG Doc # 3 Filed 09/24/14 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 12
§ 172.087 Cargo loading assumptions. ( a ) The calculations required in this subpart must be done for cargo weights and densities up to and including the maximum that is to be endorsed on the Certificate of Inspection in accordance with § 151.04-1(c) of this chapter.
( b ) For each condition of loading and operation, each cargo tank must be assumed to have its maximum free surface.
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2215 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 140 Merriman Road in Garden City, Michigan, 

as the ‘‘John J. Shivnen Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2215 EH

1 SECTION 1. JOHN J. SHIVNEN POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

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

3 Postal Service located at 140 Merriman Road in Garden 

4 City, Michigan, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘John J. Shivnen Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘John J. Shivnen Post 

10 Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 23, 

2009. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2215 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office Building’’. den City, Michigan, as the ‘‘John J. Shivnen al Service located at 140 Merriman Road in Gar-
Editorial Note on Part 153
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 153 appear by CGD-95-072, 60 FR 50465, Sept. 29, 1995, CGD-96-041, 61 FR 50732, Sept. 27, 1996, USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49235, Sept. 25, 2009, and USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59784, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 153.545 Special requirements for liquid sulfur. ( a ) A containment system carrying liquid sulfur must have: ( 1 ) A cargo tank ventilation system that: ( i ) Maintains the H2S vapor concentration below 1.85 percent by volume; and
( ii ) Prevents sulfur buildup within itself; and
( 2 ) An alarm system designed to operate when the ventilation system blower fails.
( b ) The void spaces around a cargo tank that carries liquid sulfur must be oil tight.
( c ) A cargo tank that carries liquid sulfur and the void spaces surrounding the tank must have connections for sampling vapor.
# C_2013313EN.01002301.xml

| 26.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of (Fifth Chamber) of 12 September 2013 — Palirria Souliotis v Commission

(Case T-380/11) (1)

1

(Application for annulment - Common Customs Tariff - Classification in the Combined Nomenclature - Tariff heading - Regulatory act entailing implementing measures - Inadmissibility)

2013/C 313/43

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Anonymi Viotechniki kai Emporiki Etairia Kataskevis Konservon — Palirria Souliotis AE (Politika, Greece) (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and L. Keppenne, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 447/2011 of 6 May 2011 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 2011 L 122, p. 63).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the application as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application as inadmissible;

| 2. | Orders Anonymi Viotechniki kai Emporiki Etairia Kataskevis Konservon — Palirria Souliotis AE to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Anonymi Viotechniki kai Emporiki Etairia Kataskevis Konservon — Palirria Souliotis AE to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 282, 24.9.2011.

1

---
§ 115.404 Subsequent inspections for certification. ( a ) An inspection for renewal of a Certificate of Inspection is conducted to determine if the vessel is in satisfactory condition, fit for the service intended, and complies with all applicable regulations. It normally includes inspection and testing of the structure, machinery, equipment, and on a sailing vessel, rigging and sails. The owner or operator must conduct all tests as required by the OCMI, and make the vessel available for all specific inspections and drills required by subpart H of this part. In addition, the OCMI may require the vessel to get underway.
( b ) You must submit your written application for renewal of a Certificate of Inspection to the OCMI at least 30 days prior to the expiration date of your current COI, as required in § 115.105.
[CGD 85-080, 61 FR 892, Jan. 10, 1996, as amended by USCG-1999-4976, 65 FR 6504, Feb. 9, 2000; 65 FR 11904, Mar. 7, 2000; USCG-2003-14749, 68 FR 39314, July 1, 2003]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

AUNNA CHAMBERLAIN, 

 Plaintiff, 

-vsM&M, INC. 

 Defendant 

Case No.: 14-13626 

HON. AVERN COHN 

Adam S. Alexander (P53584) 

Andrew R. Mikos (P76268) 

THE ALEXANDER LAW FIRM 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

17200 W 10 Mile Rd, Ste. 200 

Southfield, MI 48075 

(248)246-6353 

Email: adalesq@gmail.com 

John Larkin (P45752) 

LAW OFFICE OF JOHN LARKIN

Attorney for Defendant 

33680 Five Mile Rd. 

Livonia MI 48154 

734-422-2111 

larkinlaw@gmail.com 

STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL AS TO 

DEFENDANT M&M, INC.

 This matter having come before the Court upon the stipulation of the 

Plaintiff Aunna Chamberlain and Defendant M&M, Inc., through their respective 

counsel, and the Court being otherwise fully advised in the premises, Defendant 

M&M, Inc. is dismissed with prejudice and without costs or attorneys’ fees. The 

Court retains jurisdiction for a period of six (6) months to enforce the settlement 

reached by the parties. 

2:14-cv-13626-AC-RSW Doc # 12 Filed 02/27/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 36
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant M&M, Inc. is dismissed with 

prejudice and without costs or attorneys’ fees. The Court retains jurisdiction for a 

period of six (6) months to enforce the settlement reached by the parties. This is 

the final Order closing the case. 

 _____________________ 

 HON. AVERN COHN 

 U.S. District Court Judge 

Dated: ______ 

We hereby stipulate to entry of the foregoing Order. 

/s/ Adam S. Alexander (P53584) 

Andrew R. Mikos (P76268) 

THE ALEXANDER LAW FIRM 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

17200 W 10 Mile Rd, Ste. 200 

Southfield, MI 48075 

(248)246-6353 

Email: adalesq@gmail.com 

/s/ John Larkin (P45752) 

LAW OFFICE OF JOHN LARKIN

Attorney for Defendant 

33680 Five Mile Rd. 

Livonia MI 48154 

734-422-2111 

larkinlaw@gmail.com 

2:14-cv-13626-AC-RSW Doc # 12 Filed 02/27/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 37
New Jersey Department of Labor, Workmen's Compensation Bureau.

#### BERTHA KALESAVICK, PETITIONER, v. UNITED STATES METALS REFINING COMPANY, RESPONDENT.

For tlie petitioner, *Jacob Mantel.*

For the respondent, *James J. SJceffingfon.*

I find as a fact that Charles Kalesaviek, the deceased, on the 29th day of May, 1928, while in the silver furnace room, observing the operation of the said furnace, by a fellow-employe, but not taking any part in the said operation, suddenly collapsed and fell to the floor of the furnace room, striking his head on the flooring, suffering a fracture at the base of the skull resulting in his death three (3) days later.

That it is alleged in the claim petition that the decedent fell from a ladder and this is not corroborated by any testimony produced by either the petitioner or the respondent.

That there is no evidence produced to indicate that there was any accidental occurrence, causing the decedent to collapse during the course of his employment.

That the decedent was at the time of his collapse standing-on the level flooring of the furnace room, and that in the fall did not strike any object other than the floor upon which he was standing, indicating that the decedent had not been placed in a hazardous position by reason of his employment ; further,

*772That there was no testimony to indicate that there was any gas or fumes that could be considered as the cause of decedent’s collapse.

That at the time of the decedent’s observance of the operation of the silver furnace, and at the time of his collapse, there was no fire in this furnace.

That the testimony of the attending physician showed that the probable cause of this man’s collapse to be a stomach disorder, namely, gastritis due to alcoholism.

The medical testimony of the attending physician further showed that heat was not the probable cause of this man’s collapse and subsequent fall or death.

The testimony showed that the deceased suddenly crumpled up and fell to the floor as he stood watching the other man. There was no proof of any untoward event or accident as laid down in the case of Bryant *v.*Fissel, and as the court said in the case of *Reimers*v. *Proctor Publishing Co.,*85 *N. J. L.*441: “The burden of proving that death was caused by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment is under the Workmen’s Compensation act of 1911 upon the petitioner, and where the physician in attendance refused to state that death was caused by the accident, there is no basis for an inference to that effect by the court.”

The testimony of the physician attending the deceased at the time of his demise was clear that the fall was not caused by an accident or any external force, but due rather to an inherent weakened condition.

The testimony of Mrs. Kalesavick showed that he had been ill with stomach trouble before this time, and after examining all the testimony and observing the demeanor of the witness, I am satisfied that the petitioner has not sustained the burden of proving an accident arising out of and in the course of the employment.

* # * ❖ ❖

Charles E. Corbin, *Deputy Commissioner.*
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 75 (Thursday, April 19, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 19716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1941]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. 2007N-0078]


Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Estradiol 
Benzoate

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has withdrawn approval 
of two new animal drug applications (NADAs) for a suspension implant of 
estradiol benzoate microspheres used in steers and heifers fed in 
confinement for slaughter for increased rate of weight gain and 
improved feed efficiency, and in suckling beef calves for increased 
rate of weight gain. In a final rule published elsewhere in this issue 
of the Federal Register, FDA is amending the animal drug regulations to 
remove portions reflecting approval of these NADAs.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela K. Esposito, Center for 
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-212), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-276-9067; e-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#88f8e9e5ede4e9a6edfbf8e7fbe1fce7c8eeece9a6e0e0fba6efe7fe"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a0d0c1cdc5ccc18ec5d3d0cfd3c9d4cfe0c6c4c18ec8c8d38ec7cfd6">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PR Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1716 Heath Pkwy., 
Fort Collins, CO 80524, has requested that FDA withdraw approval of 
NADA 141-040 for DURALEASE (estradiol benzoate), a suspension implant 
of estradiol benzoate microspheres used in steers and heifers fed in 
confinement for slaughter for increased rate of weight gain and 
improved feed efficiency and NADA 141-041 for CELERIN-C (estradiol 
benzoate), a similar product used in suckling beef calves for increased 
rate of weight gain. This action is requested because the products are 
no longer manufactured or marketed.
    Therefore, under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food 
and Drugs, redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, and in 
accordance with 21 CFR 514.115, notice is given that approval of NADA 
141-040 and NADA 141-041 and all supplements and amendments thereto, 
were withdrawn as of September 29, 2006.
    In a final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 
Register, FDA is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect the 
withdrawal of approval of these NADAs.

    Dated: April 9, 2007.
Bernadette Dunham,
Deputy Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine.
[FR Doc. 07-1941 Filed 4-18-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2011311EN.01001801.xml

| 22.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 311/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 311/18

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud lodged on 22 July 2011 — CS AGRO Ronov s.r.o. v Ministerstvo zemědělství

(Case C-390/11)

2011/C 311/28

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: CS AGRO Ronov s.r.o.

Applicant:

Defendant: Ministerstvo zemědělství

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | On a proper interpretation of Article 4a(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006, as inserted by Council Regulation (EC) No 1261/2007 (1), does the commitment to cease delivery of a certain amount of quota beet to the undertaking with which he has concluded a delivery contract in the preceding marketing year mean a unilateral declaration of the grower that he will not deliver sugar beet in the marketing year 2008/2009, or does that commitment mean the written termination of the contractual relationship of the grower with the sugar company concerning deliveries of sugar beet for the said marketing year? |
| --- | --- |

1.

On a proper interpretation of Article 4a(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006, as inserted by Council Regulation (EC) No 1261/2007 (1), does the commitment to cease delivery of a certain amount of quota beet to the undertaking with which he has concluded a delivery contract in the preceding marketing year mean a unilateral declaration of the grower that he will not deliver sugar beet in the marketing year 2008/2009, or does that commitment mean the written termination of the contractual relationship of the grower with the sugar company concerning deliveries of sugar beet for the said marketing year?

1

commitment

| 2. | May the fact that a contractual party uses a step provided for by a directly binding EU legal provision result in the unenforceability of an obligation of that contractual party under a valid private law contract, on condition that, as a result of that fact, the other contractual party is granted funds from the public budget? |
| --- | --- |

2.

May the fact that a contractual party uses a step provided for by a directly binding EU legal provision result in the unenforceability of an obligation of that contractual party under a valid private law contract, on condition that, as a result of that fact, the other contractual party is granted funds from the public budget?

---

(1)  OJ 2007 L 58, p. 42.

1

---
Editorial Note on Part 160
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 160 appear by USCG-2012-0832, 77 FR 59785, 59786, Oct. 1, 2012.

§ 160.002-1 Incorporation by reference. ( a ) *Specifications and standards.* This subpart makes reference to the following documents: ( 1 ) Military Specifications: MIL-W-530—Webbing, Textile, Cotton. General Purpose, Natural or in Colors.
( 2 ) Federal Specification: L-P-375—Plastic Film, Flexible, Vinyl Chloride.
( 3 ) Federal Standards: No. 191—Textile Test Methods. No. 751A—Stitches, Seams, and Stitchings.
( 4 ) Coast Guard specifications: 164.003—Kapok, Processed.
( b ) *Plans.* The following plans, of the issue in effect on the date life preservers are manufactured, form a part of this specification: Dwg. No. F-49-6-1: (Sheet 1) Cutting Pattern and General Arrangement (adult). (Sheet 1A) Alternate stitching of tapes and webbing (adult and child). (Sheet 2) Pad Detail (adult). Dwg. No. F-49-6-5: (Sheet 1) Cutting Pattern and General Arrangement (child). (Sheet 2) Pad Detail (child).
( c ) *Copies on file.* Copies of the specifications and plans referred to in this section shall be kept on file by the manufacturer, together with the certificate of approval. They shall be kept for a period consisting of the duration of approval and 6 months after termination of approval. The Coast Guard specifications and plans may be obtained upon request from the Commandant (CG-ENG), Attn: Office of Design and Engineering Systems, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7509, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7509. The Federal specifications and standards may be purchased from the Business Service Center, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, 20407. The Military specifications may be obtained from the Military Specifications and Standards, Standardization Documents Order Desk, Building 4D, 700 Robbins Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19111-5094, *https://assist.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/ .*
( d ) [Reserved]
[CGFR 53-25, 18 FR 7855, Dec. 5, 1953, as amended by CGFR 65-16, 30 FR 10897, Aug. 21, 1965; CGD 78-012, 43 FR 27153, 27154, June 22, 1978; CGD 88-070, 53 FR 34535, Sept. 7, 1988; CGD 95-072, 60 FR 50467, Sept. 29, 1995; CGD 96-041, 61 FR 50733, Sept. 27, 1996; USCG-2009-0702, 74 FR 49237, Sept. 25, 2009; USCG-2013-0671, 78 FR 60156, Sept. 30, 2013]