alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2011072EN.01003603.xml

| 5.3.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.3.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/36

---

Action brought on 7 January 2011 — Descamps v Commission

(Case F-2/11)

2011/C 72/60

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Eric Descamps (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision to dismiss the applicant at the end of the probationary period and compensation for the loss suffered as a result of that decision.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision adopted on 1 March 2010 by the Director of Directorate HR.B-HR Core Processes 1: Career, Directorate-General Human Resources and Security of the European Commission, in its capacity as appointing authority, to dismiss the applicant with effect from 31 March 2010; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision adopted on 1 March 2010 by the Director of Directorate HR.B-HR Core Processes 1: Career, Directorate-General Human Resources and Security of the European Commission, in its capacity as appointing authority, to dismiss the applicant with effect from 31 March 2010;

| — | Annul, in so far as necessary, the decision of 24 September 2010 dismissing the complaint; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul, in so far as necessary, the decision of 24 September 2010 dismissing the complaint;

| — | Consequently, reinstate the applicant in his functions as a titular official with effect from 1 April 2010 and award him the amount of remuneration which he should have received as a titular official since that date, including all ancillary rights (such as pension rights), which he assesses, provisionally and ex aequo et bono, at EUR 39 600; |
| --- | --- |

—

Consequently, reinstate the applicant in his functions as a titular official with effect from 1 April 2010 and award him the amount of remuneration which he should have received as a titular official since that date, including all ancillary rights (such as pension rights), which he assesses, provisionally and ex aequo et bono, at EUR 39 600;

ex aequo et bono

| — | Order the defendant to pay damages, assessed provisionally and ex aequo et bono at EUR 10 000, for non-material damage; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay damages, assessed provisionally and ex aequo et bono at EUR 10 000, for non-material damage;

ex aequo et bono

| — | Order the defendant to pay interest for delay on the capital thus due; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay interest for delay on the capital thus due;

| — | Order the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Commission to pay the costs.

---
**Exhibit      32.1**

**Certification      Pursuant to**

**Section      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

| 1.   | The                Company's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September                30,                2006, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the                "Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly presents, in                all                material respects, the financial condition and results of operation                of the                Company. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

**In      Witness Whereof**

| /s/Henry                R.CarabelliHenry                R. CarabelliPresident                and Chief Executive Officer(Principal                Executive Officer) |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|

----
# C_2014395EN.01000301.xml

| 10.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 395/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 395/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 3 September 2014 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-127/12) (1)

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Free movement of capital - Articles 21 TFEU and 63 TFEU - EEA Agreement - Articles 28 and 40 - Taxation of inheritances and gifts - Distribution of powers of taxation - Discrimination as between residents and non-residents - Discrimination according to where the immovable property is situated - Burden of proof))

(2014/C 395/03)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: W. Roels, R. Lyal and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | declares that, by applying different tax treatment to donations and successions between beneficiaries and donees resident in Spain and those not resident in Spain, between bequeathers resident in Spain and those not resident in Spain, and between donations and similar transfers of immovable property situated within and outside of Spain, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 TFEU and Article 40 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992; |
| --- | --- |

1)

declares that, by applying different tax treatment to donations and successions between beneficiaries and donees resident in Spain and those not resident in Spain, between bequeathers resident in Spain and those not resident in Spain, and between donations and similar transfers of immovable property situated within and outside of Spain, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 TFEU and Article 40 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992;

| 2) | dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2)

dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3) | orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3)

orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 126, 28.4.2012.

---
§ 173.053 Sailing school vessels. ( a ) In addition to the requirements in §§ 173.054 through 173.063, each sailing school vessel must comply with the provisions of subpart A of part 171 of this subchapter.
( b ) In addition to regular passengers, for the purpose of complying with §§ 171.070 through 171.073 and § 171.080, the following will also be counted as passengers: ( 1 ) Sailing school students.
( 2 ) Sailing school instructors.
( 3 ) Guests.
[CGD 83-005, 51 FR 924, Jan. 9, 1986]
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 Annual Report of PCD Inc. (the    "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2002 as    filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the    "Report"), I, John J. Sheehan, III, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,    certify, pursuant to U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the    Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or    15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company    as of December 31, 2002 (the last date of the period covered by the Report).

 

 

                     /s/ John J. Sheehan, III                           John J. Sheehan, III                   Chief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of the Application of the Executors, etc., of Thomas T. Ferris.

Order modified as directed in opinion. Opinion by

Brady, J.
#### § 177.1010 Safety glazing materials.

Glass and other glazing material used in windows accessible to passengers and crew must be of material that will not break into dangerous fragments if fractured.

[CGD 85-080, 61 FR 961, Jan. 10, 1996; 61 FR 20557, May 7, 1996]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN ALLIED 

PRINTING TRADES COUNCIL, 

 Plaintiff, 

 Case No. 14-cv-14457 

v. Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow 

SCREENED IMAGES, INC., 

A Michigan Corporation, 

 Defendant. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

DAVID R. RADTKE (P47016) 

MCKNIGHT, MCCLOW, CANZANO,

SMITH & RADTKE, P.C. 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

400 Galleria Officentre, Suite 117 

Southfield, MI 48034 

248-354-9650 

dradtke@michworklaw.com 

KENNETH C. HARRISON (P39027) 

KENNETH C. HARRISON, P.C. 

Attorney for Defendant 

134 N. Main Street 

Plymouth, MI 48170 

734-454-9610 

kchpc9610@gmail.com 

__________________________________________________________________

STIPULATED ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

 The parties have reached a settlement of the above-named lawsuit. As part 

of the settlement, the parties have agreed to dismiss the lawsuit. Therefore, by 

stipulation of the parties and the Court being otherwise advised in the premises; 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is dismissed in its entirety, with 

prejudice and without costs to either party. 

Dated: March 10, 2015 s/Arthur J. Tarnow 

 Hon. Arthur J. Tarnow 

 United States District Court Judge 

2:14-cv-14457-AJT-RSW Doc # 4 Filed 03/10/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 23
I hereby stipulate to entry of this Order. 

By: /s/ David R. Radtke 

David R. Radtke (P47016) 

McKNIGHT, McCLOW, CANZANO, 

SMITH & RADTKE, P.C. 

400 Galleria Officentre, Suite 117 

Southfield, MI 48034 

248-354-9650 

dradtke@michworklaw.com 

By: /s/ Kenneth C. Harrison (with consent) 

KENNETH C. HARRISON (P39027) 

KENNETH C. HARRISON, P.C. 

Attorney for Defendant 

134 N. Main Street 

Plymouth, MI 48170 

734-454-9610 

kchpc9610@gmail.com 

Dated: March 5, 2015 

P:\Allied\SE MI\Screened Images\Pleadings\Dismiss Stip and Order.docx 

2:14-cv-14457-AJT-RSW Doc # 4 Filed 03/10/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 24
§ 196.35-5 Actions required to be logged. The actions and observations noted in this section shall be entered in the official logbook. This section contains no requirements which are not made in other portions of this subchapter, the items being merely grouped together for convenience. ( a ) Onboard training, musters, and drills: held in accordance with subchapter W (Lifesaving Appliances and Arrangements) of this chapter.
( b ) Steering gear, whistle, and means of communication. Prior to departure. See § 196.15-3.
( c ) Drafts and load line marks. Prior to leaving port, ocean, coastwise, and Great Lakes service only. See § 196.15-5.
( d ) Verification of vessel compliance with applicable stability requirements. After loading and prior to departure and at all other times necessary to assure the safety of the vessel. See § 196.15-7.
( e ) Loading doors. Where applicable, every closing and any opening when not docked. See § 196.15-18.
( f ) Emergency lighting and power systems. Weekly and semiannually. See § 196.15-30.
( g ) Fuel oil data: Upon receipt of fuel oil on board. See § 196.15-55.
( h ) Hatches and other openings. All openings and closings required by § 196.15-20.
( i ) Magazines and magazine chests. Maximum and minimum temperatures as required by § 196.85-1(b).
( j ) Portable vans, prior to departure. See § 195.11-25(e) of this subchapter.
( k ) Weight handling gear, prior to departure. See § 189.35-13(b) of this subchapter.
[CGFR 67-83, 33 FR 1158, Jan. 27, 1988, as amended by CGD 89-037, 57 FR 41828, Sept. 11, 1992; CGD 84-069, 61 FR 25313, May 20, 1996]
Case 2:15-mj-30088-DUTY ECF No. 1, PageID.1 Filed 02/19/15 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:15-mj-30088-DUTY ECF No. 1, PageID.2 Filed 02/19/15 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:15-mj-30088-DUTY ECF No. 1, PageID.3 Filed 02/19/15 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:15-mj-30088-DUTY ECF No. 1, PageID.4 Filed 02/19/15 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:15-mj-30088-DUTY ECF No. 1, PageID.5 Filed 02/19/15 Page 5 of 5
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 4
Federal Reserve Bank of: Cleveland

## Filings received during the week ending March 11, 2006

|Filer              | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                      | End of Comment Period                                  
|------------------ | -------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------
|Ohio Commerce Bank | Member         | Application by Ohio Commerce Bank, Beachwood, Ohio, to become a member of the Federal Reserve System | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:         | Not applicable
|Federal Register:  | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNITED
PAN-EUROPE COMMUNICATION'S N.V. FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> DUTCH GUILDERS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   2.07
<CASH>                                         176,925
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  207,708
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (13,509)
<INVENTORY>                                    132,031
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               655,221
<PP&E>                                       3,512,313
<DEPRECIATION>                               (285,340)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,690,268
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,241,155
<BONDS>                                      4,687,806
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       573,853
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,272,240
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,690,268
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               276,604
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                (532,883)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (125,643)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (381,486)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,918
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (375,568)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (375,568)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.89)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.89)


</TABLE>
|EXHIBIT 32(a)



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 Axonyx Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Marvin S. Hausman,
M.D, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to my knowledge:
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 1. | the
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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/ Marvin S. Hausman, M.D.

Marvin S. Hausman, M.D
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 

|August 11, 2004


A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or
otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

____________

No. 14-5249 September Term, 2014

1:14-cv-01500-CKK

Filed On: February 20, 2015

Independence Institute, A Colorado nonprofit

corporation,

Appellant

v.

Federal Election Commission,

Appellee

BEFORE: Henderson, Srinivasan, and Pillard, Circuit Judges

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the motion for summary affirmance, the opposition thereto

and motion for summary reversal, the reply in support of the motion for summary

affirmance and opposition to the motion for summary reversal, and the reply in support of

the motion for summary reversal, it is

ORDERED that the motions for summary disposition be denied. The merits of the

parties’ positions are not so clear as to warrant summary action. See Taxpayers

Watchdog, Inc. v. Stanley, 819 F.2d 294, 297 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (per curiam).

Because the court has determined that summary disposition is not in order, the

Clerk is instructed to calendar this case for presentation to a merits panel.

Per Curiam

USCA Case #14-5249 Document #1538642 Filed: 02/20/2015 Page 1 of 1
Minutes from Call with Wayne Morris (Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers):

Date: 9/18/09 Purpose: Discuss hypothesis for Product Price Determination Interviewers: Ari Reeves, Dan Lauf (D&R International, Ltd.) 

## Summary

• The supply chain for battery chargers a nd external power supplies (BCEPS) is complex, but typically appears as: Electronic Components Manufacturers Æ BCEPS Manufacturers Æ OEMs Æ Retailers

. o Variations in this supply chain exist, such as cases where BCEPS manufacturers and OEMs of the end-us e product are the same companies.



## Detail The supply chain for BCEPS applications is complex, specifically when the breadth and number of products using BCEPS is take n into account. Fewer OEMs manufacture BCEPS in house. Typically, the dist ribution chain appears as follows:

Electronic Component Manufacturers Æ BCEPS Manufacturers Æ OEMs Æ Retailers

There has been a trend, however, towa rds OEMs outsourcing manufacturing to companies overseas. This adds an additional step to the supply chain. In contrast, there are retailers who have purchased or created th eir own brands. The reta ilers can license the manufacturing of products under private labels. This arrangement shortens the supply chain.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 Case Number: 15-cr-20178 

 v. 

 Honorable Thomas L. Ludington 

RICHARD DUWAYNE STUBBS, Jr., Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris 

 Defendant. 

_______________________________________/ 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, ACCEPTING 

DEFENDANT’S PLEA OF GUILTY, AND TAKING THE RULE 11 PLEA 

AGREEMENT UNDER ADVISEMENT 

On November 5, 2015, United States Magistrate Judge Patricia T. Morris conducted a 

plea hearing pursuant to Defendant’s consent. The Magistrate Judge issued her report the next 

day, recommending that this Court accept Defendant’s plea of guilty. 

Although the Magistrate Judge’s report explicitly stated that the parties to this action may 

object to and seek review of the recommendation within fourteen days of service of the report, 

neither Plaintiff nor Defendant filed any objections. The election not to file objections to the 

Magistrate Judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently review the record. 

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). The failure to file objections to the report and 

recommendation waives any further right to appeal. 

 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation 

(ECF No. 16) is ADOPTED. 

 It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s plea of guilty is ACCEPTED, and the Rule 11 

Plea Agreement (ECF No. 15) is taken UNDER ADVISEMENT. 

1:15-cr-20178-TLL-PTM Doc # 18 Filed 11/30/15 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 67
Dated: November 30, 2015 s/Thomas L. Ludington 

 THOMAS L. LUDINGTON 

 United States District Judge 

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served 

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first 

class U.S. mail on November 30, 2015. 

 s/Michael A. Sian 

 MICHAEL A. SIAN, Case Manager 

1:15-cr-20178-TLL-PTM Doc # 18 Filed 11/30/15 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 68