alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016165EN.01001001.xml

| 10.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/10

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Pordenone (Italy) lodged on 22 February 2016 — Criminal proceedings against Giorgio Fidenato

(Case C-107/16)

(2016/C 165/11)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court:

Referring court:

Tribunale di Pordenone

Criminal proceedings against:

Criminal proceedings against:

Giorgio Fidenato

Questions referred for a preliminary ruling

Questions referred for a preliminary ruling

| 1. | When requested to do so by a Member State, is the Commission required, for the purposes of Article 54(1) of Regulation No 178/2002, (1) to adopt emergency measures even if the Commission does not consider there to be a serious and evident risk to human and animal health or to the environment? |
| --- | --- |

1.

When requested to do so by a Member State, is the Commission required, for the purposes of Article 54(1) of Regulation No 178/2002, (1) to adopt emergency measures even if the Commission does not consider there to be a serious and evident risk to human and animal health or to the environment?

1

| 2. | If the Commission has notified the Member State that the conditions for the adoption of emergency measures do not exist, may the Member State take measures pursuant to Article 53 of Regulation No 178/2002? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the Commission has notified the Member State that the conditions for the adoption of emergency measures do not exist, may the Member State take measures pursuant to Article 53 of Regulation No 178/2002?

| 3. | May the Member State, on the basis of the precautionary principle, adopt emergency measures pursuant to Article 34 of Regulation No 1829/2003 (2) even where the conditions of serious and evident risk are not present, and may it maintain such measures in force when the Commission, after examining the opinion of EFSA, notifies it that the conditions necessary for the adoption of emergency measures are not met? |
| --- | --- |

3.

May the Member State, on the basis of the precautionary principle, adopt emergency measures pursuant to Article 34 of Regulation No 1829/2003 (2) even where the conditions of serious and evident risk are not present, and may it maintain such measures in force when the Commission, after examining the opinion of EFSA, notifies it that the conditions necessary for the adoption of emergency measures are not met?

2

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (OJ 2002 L 31, p 1).

1

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed (OJ 2003 L 268, p 1).

2

---
##### 



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 This certification is provided pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, and accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 of
Horizon Offshore, Inc. (the Company) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report). I, David W. Sharp, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities 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/ David W. Sharp David W. Sharp
President and
Chief Executive Officer
May 10, 2005
# C_2016279EN.01001801.xml

| 1.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Cuenca (Spain) lodged on 13 May 2016 — Carlos Enrique Ruiz Conejero v Ferroser Servicios Auxiliares, S.A. and Ministerio Fiscal

(Case C-270/16)

(2016/C 279/24)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Cuenca

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Carlos Enrique Ruiz Conejero

Applicant:

Defendants: Ferroser Servicios Auxiliares, S.A. and Ministerio Fiscal

Defendants:

Question referred

Question referred

Does Directive 2000/78 (1) preclude the application of a provision of national law under which an employer is entitled to dismiss an employee on objective grounds for absences from work, albeit justified but intermittent, which amount to 20 % of the employee’s working hours in two consecutive months, provided that the total absences in the previous 12 months amount to 5 % of working hours or 25 % of working hours in four non-consecutive months within a 12-month period, in the case of an employee who must be treated as disabled within the meaning of the directive when his absence from work was caused by his disability?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16).

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DONALD T. ELLIS, :

Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, : No. 04-CV-3468

Commissioner of the :

Social Security Administration, :

Defendant :

O R D E R

ANITA B. BRODY, J.

AND NOW, this day of , 2005, after careful review of the Report

and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Timothy R. Rice, IT IS 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 remand is DENIED.

4. This matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner pursuant to the fourth sentence

of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

BY THE COURT:

 

ANITA B. BRODY, J.

Case 2:04-cv-03468-AB Document 18 Filed 07/19/05 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DONALD T. ELLIS, :

Plaintiff : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, : No. 04-CV-3468

Commissioner of the :

Social Security Administration, :

Defendant :

ORDER OF JUDGMENT

ANITA B. BRODY, J.

AND NOW, this day of , 2005, in accordance with my

order approving and adopting the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate

Judge Timothy R. Rice, and in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, judgment is

hereby entered REMANDING the decision of the Commissioner that denied benefits to plaintiff

Donald T. Ellis.

BY THE COURT:

 

ANITA B. BRODY, J.

Case 2:04-cv-03468-AB Document 18 Filed 07/19/05 Page 2 of 2
# C_2017053EN.01002201.xml

| 20.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 53/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 53/22

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin (Germany) lodged on 14 November 2016 — INEOS Köln GmbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland

(Case C-572/16)

(2017/C 053/29)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: INEOS Köln GmbH

Applicant:

Defendant: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Do the provisions of Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (1) and the provisions of Commission Decision 2011/278/EU of 27 April 2011 determining transitional Union-wide rules for harmonised free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10a of Directive 2003/87/EC (2) preclude legislation enacted by a Member State which, for the 2013-2020 trading period, prescribes a mandatory substantive time limit applicable to out-of-time applications for the allocation of free emissions allowances to existing installations, thereby making it impossible to correct errors or to supplement (incomplete) data in the allocation application in cases where such shortcomings are not established until after the time limit laid down by the Member State has expired?

1

2

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 275, p. 32.

1

(2)  OJ 2011 L 130, p. 1.

2

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>



<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                     236,386,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                              192,643,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 5,924,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           567,865,000
<PP&E>                                     790,776,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              81,029,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           3,068,439,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      615,740,000
<BONDS>                                  1,406,933,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       639,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 944,004,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             3,068,439,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         1,034,175,000
<CGS>                                      759,805,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              405,313,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          73,983,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (199,535,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 4,300,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (203,835,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                             (203,835,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.09)
















</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.1
                                                                    ------------


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



The Board of Directors
GMX Resources Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-106311) on Form S-8 of GMX Resources Inc. and registration statements (Nos.
333-123209, 333-117256, and 333-115571) on Form S-3 of our report dated April 6,
2004, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of GMX Resources Inc. as
of December 31, 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
changes in shareholders' equity, and cash flows for the year then ended, which
report appears in the December 31, 2004, annual report on Form 10-KSB of GMX
Resources Inc.

Our report refers to a changes in the method of accounting for asset retirement
obligations.

KPMG LLP


Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
March 28, 2005
# C_2015406EN.01003901.xml

| 7.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 406/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 406/39

---

Action brought on 1 October 2015 — Uribe-Etxebarría Jiménez v OHIM — Núcleo de comunicaciones y control (SHERPA)

(Case T-577/15)

(2015/C 406/40)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Xabier Uribe-Etxebarría Jiménez (Erandio, Spain) (represented by: Esteve Sanz, lawyer)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Núcleo de comunicaciones y control, SL (Tres Cantos (Madrid), Spain)

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘SHERPA’– Community trade mark No 10 000 339

Procedure before OHIM: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 July 2015 in Case R 1135/2014-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision. |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision.

| — | order OHIM and, where appropriate, the intervener to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM and, where appropriate, the intervener to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Articles 63(1), 64(1) and 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 63(1), 64(1) and 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.

| — | Infringement of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 and of Rule 22 of Regulation No 2868/95. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 and of Rule 22 of Regulation No 2868/95.

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

—

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

---
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**

To the Board of Directorsand Stockholders

INTACInternational, Inc.

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement onForm S-3 File No. 333-116871 and the Registration Statement onForm S-8 File No. 333-115147 of INTAC International, Inc. and inthe related Prospectuses of our reports dated December 8,  2006 with respect to the consolidatedfinancial statements of INTAC International, Inc.and subsidiaries, management’sassessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting,and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of INTACInternational, Inc. and subsidiaries, included in this Annual Report(Form 10-K) for the year ended September 30, 2006, the nine monthperiod ended September 30, 2005 and the year ended December 31, 2004.

 
| /s/ KBA Group LLP       |   |   |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|
| Dallas, Texas           |   |
| December  14, 2006 |   |

 

----
# July

# image1.jpg
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-01-1999
<CASH>                                          11,030
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    162,105
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               220,043
<PP&E>                                         192,039
<DEPRECIATION>                                (69,681)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 357,636
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          128,227
<BONDS>                                        194,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,637)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   357,636
<SALES>                                        142,280
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               142,975
<CGS>                                           78,918
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  146,951
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,346
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,322)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,130
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,192)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,192)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
No. 61765.

#### S. Cavallo, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 305483-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of headboards similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 61224, the items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption prior to June 30, 1956, were held dutiable at *12%*percent under paragraph 412, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 51802), and the items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on and after said date were held dutiable at *11%*percent under said paragraph, as modified by the Sixth Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 54108).
| Subsidiary                             | Jurisdiction of Incorporation |   Ownership Interest  |
|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
| Arcos del GourmetS.A.                  | Argentina                               |   90.00%                        |
| FibesaS.A.                             | Argentina                               |   100.00%                       |
| EmprendimientoRecoleta S.A.            | Argentina                               |   53.68%                        |
| ShoppingNeuquén S.A.              | Argentina                               |   99.95%                        |
| Panamerican MallS.A.                   | Argentina                               |   80.00%                        |
| TorodurS.A.                            | Uruguay                                 |   100.00%                       |
| EntertainmentHoldings S.A.             | Argentina                               |   70.00%                        |
| EntretenimientoUniversal S.A.          | Argentina                               |   98.75%                        |
| Centro deEntretenimientos La Plata S.A | Argentina                               |   100.00%                       |
| ParetoS.A                              | Argentina                               |   69.96%                        |
# C_2017382EN.01001701.xml

| 13.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 382/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 382/17

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 14 September 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven administrativen sad — Bulgaria) — Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia v ‘Iberdrola Inmobiliaria Real Estate Investments’ EOOD

(Case C-132/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Common system of value added tax - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 26(1)(b) and Articles 168 and 176 - Deduction of input tax - Services relating to construction or improvement of a property belonging to a third party - Use of services by the third party and by the taxable person - Service supplied free of charge to the third party - Entry of costs incurred for services carried out in the accounts as part of the taxable person’s general costs - Determination of the existence of a direct and immediate link with the economic activity of the taxable person))

(2017/C 382/19)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Referring court

Varhoven administrativen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ — Sofia

Applicant:

Defendant:‘Iberdrola Inmobiliaria Real Estate Investments’ EOOD

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 168(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that a taxable person has the right to deduct input value added tax in respect of a supply of services consisting of the construction or improvement of a property owned by a third party when that third party enjoys the results of those services free of charge and when those services are used both by the taxable person and by the third party in the context of their economic activity, in so far as those services do not exceed that which is necessary to allow that taxable person to carry out the taxable output transactions and where their cost is included in the price of those transactions.

---

(1)  OJ C 175, 17.5.2016.

1

---
No. 61760.

#### John V. Carr & Son, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 271019-K (Detroit).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of yellow cedar the same in all material respects as that the subject of *Border Brokerage Co. et al.*v. *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 179, C. D. 1923), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the First Division,

July 24, 1950

No. 54560.

#### Max Stern & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 122056-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of *S. Nathan & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.