alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016305EN.01001702.xml

| 22.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/17

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Albacete (Spain) lodged on 15 June 2016 — José Luís Núñez Torreiro v Seguros Chartis Europe, S.A.

(Case C-334/16)

(2016/C 305/25)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Albacete

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: José Luís Núñez Torreiro

Appellant:

Respondent: Seguros Chartis Europe, S.A.

Respondent:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | May the concept ‘use of vehicles’, as an insurance risk for civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, to which the Community legislation (inter alia, Article 3 of Directive 2009/103/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009) refers, be determined by the national legislation of a Member State differently from how it is determined by the Community legislation? |
| --- | --- |

1.

May the concept ‘use of vehicles’, as an insurance risk for civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, to which the Community legislation (inter alia, Article 3 of Directive 2009/103/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009) refers, be determined by the national legislation of a Member State differently from how it is determined by the Community legislation?

(inter alia

1

| 2. | If so, may that concept exclude (in addition to specific persons, plates or types of vehicles, as recognised by Article 5(1) and (2) of that Directive) circumstances which depend on the place in which the vehicle is used, such as roads, or terrain ‘unsuitable’ for motor vehicles? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If so, may that concept exclude (in addition to specific persons, plates or types of vehicles, as recognised by Article 5(1) and (2) of that Directive) circumstances which depend on the place in which the vehicle is used, such as roads, or terrain ‘unsuitable’ for motor vehicles?

| 3. | Similarly, is it possible to exclude as ‘use of a vehicle’ certain activities of the vehicle relating to its purpose (such as its sporting, industrial or agricultural use) or relating to the driver’s intention (for example, the commission of an intentional offence with the vehicle)? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Similarly, is it possible to exclude as ‘use of a vehicle’ certain activities of the vehicle relating to its purpose (such as its sporting, industrial or agricultural use) or relating to the driver’s intention (for example, the commission of an intentional offence with the vehicle)?

---

(1)  Directive 2009/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability.

1

OJ 2009 L 263, p. 11.

---
```

           FORM OF ANNUAL SERVICER'S CERTIFICATE

MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A.

MBNA MASTER CREDIT CARD TRUST II

         The undersigned, a duly authorized representative of MBNA America Bank, N.A. (the
"Bank"), as Servicer pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 4, 1994
(the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement") by and between the Bank and The Bank of New York,
as trustee, (the "Trustee") does hereby certify that:

         1.  The Bank is Servicer under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.

         2.  The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Trustee.

         3.  This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 3.05 of the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement.

         4.  A review of the activities of the Servicer during the twelve-month period ended June 30,
2001 was conducted under my supervision.

         5.  Based on such review, the Servicer has, to my knowledge, fully performed all its
obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement throughout such twelve-month period
and no material default in the performance of such obligations has occurred or is continuing
except as set forth in paragraph 6 below.

         6.  The following is a description of each material default in the performance of the
Servicer's obligations under the provisions of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement known to the
undersigned to have been made during such period which sets forth in detail (i) the nature of each
such default, (ii) the action taken by the Servicer, if any, to remedy each such default and (iii) the
current status of each such default:

"None"

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 15th day
of August 2001.

                                                                                                                                                Name:    Douglas O. Hart
```
Case No. 8,372.

#### LINGER v. WOOSTER.

[See Case No. 12,901a.]
### The Honorable Rodney S. Webb, Chief Judge, United State s 1 

### Dis trict Court for the District of North Dakota, adopting th e report and recommendation of the Honorable Karen K. Klein, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of North Dakota. ___________ No. 95-3944

___________ Patty Swenson, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * District of North Dakota. * Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner * [UNPUBLISHED] of Social Security, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: July 17, 1996 Filed: July 26, 1996

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

___________ PER CURIAM. Patty Sw enson appeals from the final order entered in the distric t court af firming the decision to deny her application for Social Security

1 disability benefits and supplemental security income (SSI). We affirm.

Swenson was born in 1960, and worked as a trained medical aid, a nurse's aid, and a cook/dishwasher, among other things. In September 1992 , Swenson applied for benefits alleging disability due to severe pain in her right leg. Swenson's application was denied initially and upo n reconsideration. At a December 1993

### -2-

hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), Swenson, her husband, an d a vocational expert testified.
The ALJ found Swenson was not disabled. The ALJ discounted Swe nson's subjec tive complaints to the extent she alleged total disability, an d concluded that Swenson's limitations did not prevent her from performing past r elevant work. The Appeals Council considered additional medica l records submitted by Swenson, including a report stating a psychologist's opinion that Swenson' s pain was genuine, but denied review. The district court affirmed the denial of benefits, and Swenson appeals.
Having re viewed the record, including the new evidence submitted to the Appeals Council, we conclude that substantial evidence on the record
as a whole supports the ALJ's evaluation of Swenson's subjective complaint s of pain under the standards set forth in Polaski v. Heckler , 739 F.2d 1320 , 1322 (8th Cir. 1984), as well as the ALJ's decision that Swenson coul d perform her past relevant work. See Baumgarten v. Chater , 75 F.3d 366, 36 8 (8th Cir. 1996) (standard of review).
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.
A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2


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


In connection with the Annual Report of Citizens First Bancorp, Inc., (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Timothy
D. Regan, Chief Financial 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:

         (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 as of and for the period covered by the
              Report.


/s/ Timothy D. Regan
--------------------------------

Timothy D. Regan
Chief Financial Officer
March 15, 2004
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOHN D. FRICKER : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

JO ANNE B. BARNHART : NO. 04-5016

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 31st day of May , 2005, after careful and

independent consideration of the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment, the

plaintiff’s reply brief and after review of the Report and Recommendation of United

States Magistrate Judge Diane M. Welsh, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;

2. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED;

3. The defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED; and

4. The final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security which denied

disability insurance and supplemental security income benefits to the plaintiff is

REVERSED and the case is REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security

pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) for further proceedings consistent with

Judge Welsh’s Report and Recommendation.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g),

that JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of the plaintiff.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Edmund V. Ludwig 

LUDWIG, J.

Case 2:04-cv-05016-EL Document 11 Filed 05/31/05 Page 1 of 1
# C_2016175EN.01001101.xml

| 17.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 175/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/11

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 60 de Madrid (Spain) lodged on 29 February 2016 — Abanca Corporación Bancaria S.A. v Juan José González Rey and Others

(Case C-120/16)

(2016/C 175/12)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 60 de Madrid (Spain)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Abanca Corporación Bancaria S.A.

Applicant:

Defendants: Juan José González Rey, María Consuelo González Rey and Francisco Rodríguez Alonso

Defendants:

Question referred

Question referred

Is the use of an agreed remunerative interest rate in a situation in which default interest is applicable in accordance with Directive 93/13 (1) or, on the contrary, does it presuppose an amendment of the contract which is not permitted under EU case-law?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).

1

---
IPAC Operational Metrics for August 2017

Dollar Amount % of Total Dollar Amount Number of Transactions % of Total Number of Transactions

Fiduciary (Investment & Borrowing) 9,274,941,450,773 99.31% 13,394 10.35%

Buy/Sell 56,573,072,630 0.61% 114,500 88.52%

Benefits (RITS) 7,766,584,613 0.08% 454 0.35%

Check Aftermath (TRACS) 86,509,617 0.00% 1,007 0.78%

Zero Dollar 0 0.00% 1 0.00%

Grand Total - August 2017 9,339,367,617,633 100.00% 129,356 100.00%

Grand Total - July 2017 8,725,779,789,330 100.00% 114,003 100.00%

July to August Change 613,587,828,303 15,353

Percentage Change 7.032% 13.467%

Grand Total - August 2016 17,207,750,459,274 121,888

August 2016 to August 2017 Change -7,868,382,841,642 7,468

Percentage Change -45.7% 6.1%

Volume by Transaction Type
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

RICHARD BRIDGE and

ELLEN BRIDGE

:

:

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4240

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04240-MK Document 6 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE J. CREW
OPERATING CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FROM THE THREE MONTHS ENDED APRIL 29, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           FEB-3-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-29-2000
<CASH>                                          18,370
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    135,455
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               181,006
<PP&E>                                         225,793
<DEPRECIATION>                                (83,837)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 340,184
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          116,809
<BONDS>                                        180,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (5,685)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   340,184
<SALES>                                        158,032
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               158,809
<CGS>                                           85,479
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  158,476
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,573
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,240)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,140)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,140)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Before the Third Division,

April 10, 1961

No. 65424.

#### Capitol Distributors Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/34097, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
# C_2016068EN.01004101.xml

| 22.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/41

---

Action brought on 22 December 2015 — Facebook v OHIM — Brand IP Licensing (lovebook)

(Case T-757/15)

(2016/C 068/52)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Facebook, Inc. (Menlo Park, United States) (represented by: M. Granado Carpenter and M. Polo Carreño, lawyers)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Brand IP Licensing Ltd (Road Town, British Virgin Islands)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘lovebook’ — Community trade mark application No 9 926 577

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM:

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 September 2015 in Case R 2028/2014-2

Contested decision:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in its entirety, insofar as it annuls the decision of the Opposition Division which upheld the opposition against the CTM application No 9 926 577 LOVEBOOK on the basis of likelihood of confusion, based in its conclusions that the similarities of the signs are minor in relation to their differences, that the overall impression of the signs in the perception of the relevant public is that they are not similar, and that this is so, even if the earlier trademarks enjoy enhanced distinctiveness; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in its entirety, insofar as it annuls the decision of the Opposition Division which upheld the opposition against the CTM application No 9 926 577 LOVEBOOK on the basis of likelihood of confusion, based in its conclusions that the similarities of the signs are minor in relation to their differences, that the overall impression of the signs in the perception of the relevant public is that they are not similar, and that this is so, even if the earlier trademarks enjoy enhanced distinctiveness;

| — | order reimbursement of its costs in this appeal before the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order reimbursement of its costs in this appeal before the General Court.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
# C_2018319EN.01000401.xml

| 10.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 319/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 319/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 July 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — proceedings brought by CX

(Case C-629/16) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - International road transport - Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey - Article 9 - Additional Protocol - Articles 41 and 42 - Freedom to provide services - Standstill clause - Decision No 1/95 of the EC-Turkey Association Council - Articles 5 and 7 - Free movement of goods - National legislation restricting the right of road haulage undertakings with their seat in Turkey to operate their vehicles in the territory of the Member State concerned - Obligation to obtain an authorisation issued within the limits of a quota determined on the basis of a bilateral agreement concluded between that Member State and Turkey or a permit granted for a single transport of substantial public interest))

(2018/C 319/04)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

CX

Other party: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Schärding

Operative part of the judgment

The provisions of the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey signed on 12 September 1963 at Ankara by the Republic of Turkey, of the one part, and the Member States of the EEC and the Community, of the other part, concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Decision 64/732/EEC of 23 December 1963, the Additional Protocol signed on 23 November 1970 at Brussels, concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972, and Decision No 1/95 of the EC-Turkey Association Council of 22 December 1995 on implementing the final phase of the Customs Union must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which road haulage undertakings with their seat in Turkey can transport goods by road to that Member State or through its territory only if they have passes issued within the limits of a quota determined for such transport on the basis of the bilateral agreement concluded between that Member State and the Republic of Turkey or if a permit has been granted to them on the ground of substantial public interest, provided that that legislation is not a new restriction on the freedom to provide services within the meaning of Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol, which is for the referring court to ascertain.

---

(1)  OJ C 104, 3.4.2017.

---
# C_2017161EN.01002701.xml

| 22.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/27

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Policolor v EUIPO — CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt (Policolor)

(Case T-178/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark Policolor - Earlier EU figurative mark ProfiColor - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 161/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Policolor SA (Bucharest, Romania) (represented by: M. Comanescu, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt GmbH & Co. KG (Düren-Merken, Germany)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 January 2016 (Case R 346/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt and Policolor.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Policolor SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Policolor SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 211, 13.6.2016.

1

---
United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

January 20, 2011 

ERRATA 

______________________ 

Appeal No. 2010-1147 

PAPIERFABRIK AUGUST KOEHLER AG AND

KOEHLER AMERICA, INC., 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

AND

MITSUBISHI INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION,

MITSUBISHI HITEC PAPER FLENSBURG GMBH,

AND MITSUBISHI HITEC PAPER BIELEFELD

GMBH, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

UNITED STATES, 

Defendant, 

AND

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, 

Defendant-Appellee, 

AND
APPLETON PAPERS INC., 

Defendant-Appellee. 

Decided: January 11, 2011 

Nonprecedential Opinion 

______________________ 

Please make the following change: 

Page 7, line 5, change “19 U.S.C. § 156a(b)(1)(B)(i)” to 

--19 U.S.C. § 1516a(b)(1)(B)(i)--.