alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2012 - 0083 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2010 - SW - 022 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
# C_2016038EN.01006702.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/67 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/67

---

Action brought on 26 November 2015 — Sulayr Global Service v OHIM — Sulayr Calidad (sulayr GLOBAL SERVICE)

(Case T-685/15)

(2016/C 038/91)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Sulayr Global Service, SL (Valle del Zalabi, Spain) (represented by: P. López Ronda, G. Macías Bonilla, G. Marín Raigal, and E. Armero Lavie, 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: Sulayr Calidad, SL (Granada, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant for the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word elements ‘sulayr GLOBAL SERVICE’ — Application for registration No 11 960 515

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 September 2015 in Case R 149/2015-1

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision, in so far as it found a similarity between the services sought in class 40 and the services covered by the earlier mark in class 42 and consequently, a risk of confusion as regards those services; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision, in so far as it found a similarity between the services sought in class 40 and the services covered by the earlier mark in class 42 and consequently, a risk of confusion as regards those services;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 60 of Regulation No 207/2009 and Rule 49(1) of Regulation No 2868/95. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 60 of Regulation No 207/2009 and Rule 49(1) of Regulation No 2868/95.

| — | Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009.

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

—

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

---
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 1 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 2 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 3 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 4 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 5 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 6 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 7 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 8 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 9 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 10 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 11 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 12 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 13 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 14 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 15 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 16 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 17 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 18 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 19 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 20 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 21 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 22 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 23 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 24 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 25 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 26 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 27 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 28 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 29 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 30 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 31 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 32 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 33 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 34 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 35 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 36 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 37 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 38 of 39
Case 2:05-cv-00110-GP Document 9 Filed 03/24/05 Page 39 of 39
# C_2016106EN.01002501.xml

| 21.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 106/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/25

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 11 January 2016 — Euro Park Service, having assumed the rights and obligations of Cairnbulg Nanteuil v Ministre des finances et des comptes publics

(Case C-14/16)

(2016/C 106/27)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Euro Park Service, having assumed the rights and obligations of Cairnbulg Nanteuil

Appellant:

Respondent: Ministre des finances et des comptes publics

Respondent:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | When national legislation of a Member State makes use, in domestic law, of the option under Article 11(1) of Council Directive 90/434/EEC of 23 July 1990, as amended, on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, (1) is there scope for the measures adopted for the implementation of that option to be reviewed in the light of primary EU law? |
| --- | --- |

1.

When national legislation of a Member State makes use, in domestic law, of the option under Article 11(1) of Council Directive 90/434/EEC of 23 July 1990, as amended, on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States, (1) is there scope for the measures adopted for the implementation of that option to be reviewed in the light of primary EU law?

1

| 2. | If so, must the provisions of Article 43 of the Treaty establishing the European Union, now Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be interpreted as precluding national legislation, aimed at preventing tax evasion or avoidance, from imposing a condition that the use of the common system of taxation applicable to mergers and transactions treated as such is to be subject to a process of prior approval only as regards transfers made to foreign legal persons, but not transfers made to legal persons incorporated under national law? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If so, must the provisions of Article 43 of the Treaty establishing the European Union, now Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, be interpreted as precluding national legislation, aimed at preventing tax evasion or avoidance, from imposing a condition that the use of the common system of taxation applicable to mergers and transactions treated as such is to be subject to a process of prior approval only as regards transfers made to foreign legal persons, but not transfers made to legal persons incorporated under national law?

---

(1)  OJ 1990 L 225, p. 1.

1

---
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 32.1

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


      In connection with this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Integrated
Healthcare Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended September 30,
2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (i) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company at the dates and for the period indicated

      This Certificate has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.


                                        INTEGRATED HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, INC.

Dated: November 14, 2008              By:  /s/ Bruce Mogel
                                           ------------------------------
                                           Bruce Mogel
                                           Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS, CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE THIRTEEN WEEKS
ENDED MAY 3, 1998.
</LEGEND> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-02-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-03-1998
<CASH>                                           6,199
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,011
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,568
<INVENTORY>                                    373,257
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               434,518
<PP&E>                                         178,986
<DEPRECIATION>                                (87,193)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 571,510
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          200,079
<BONDS>                                         81,250
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           277
<OTHER-SE>                                      76,460
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   571,510
<SALES>                                        238,423
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               238,423
<CGS>                                          130,706
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  230,447
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,198
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,222)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (470)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (752)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (6,767)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,519)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.32)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Transition Report of Citizens First Bancorp, Inc., (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 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.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.

                                    By: /s/ Timothy D. Regan
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                    Timothy D. Regan, Chief Financial Officer
                                    Dated: March 27, 2003
A. K., Mother of A. K., Minor Child,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN 

AND FAMILIES,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-1421

_____________________________/

Opinion filed February 13, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County.

Brantley S. Clark, Jr., Judge.

A. K., pro se, Appellant.

Rebecca Kapusta, Interim General Counsel, Department of Children and Families, 

Tallahassee and Dwight O. Slater, Appellate Counsel, Children Legal Services, 

Tallahassee, for Appellee. Kelley Schaeffer, Appellate Counsel, Guardian ad 

Litem Program, Tavares.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS, C.J., BENTON, and THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-6912

ROY ALLEN THOMAS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA; T. RAY, Warden; T. ADAMS, Sgt.; G. CHILDRESS, Sgt.; SERGEANT DAY; SERGEANT FLEMING; MCMULLINS, Sergeant; OFFICER LAMBERT; OFFICER SMITH; GREERE, Officer; D. MCNIGHT, Food Services; HEALTH SERVICES DIRECTOR; WEBB, Officer; DIRECTOR OF DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; R. FLEMING, Major; NURSE ADAMS; NURSE MULLINS; SAM BOYD, Officer; FOOD SERVICES DIRECTOR; DR. WILLIAMS; GRIEVANCE DEPARTMENT; L. HALL, Officer; ASSISTANT UNIT MANAGER HORN, Officer; WARDEN ARMENTROUT, Assistant; MAILROOM STAFF, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, District Judge. (CA-05-232-7) Submitted: October 26, 2005 Decided: November 21, 2005 Before LUTTIG, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roy Allen Thomas, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.- 2 - Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 3 - PER CURIAM: Roy Allen Thomas, Jr. appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action, alleging deliberate indifference to medical needs, for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Thomas v. Virginia , No. CA-05-232-7 (W.D. Va. Apr. 22, 2005). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LANIESE PERRY :

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4249

Plaintiff, :

:

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 SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a

GlaxoSmithKline.

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-04249-HH Document 8 Filed 10/02/2002 Page 1 of 1
1 

### D'Agostino, Kathleen

From: **DELONEY, SCOTT [SDELONEY@idem.IN.gov]** Sent: **Monday, March 18, 2013 12:50 PM** To: **D'Agostino, Kathleen; sagoff, kendra; Aburano, Doug las**  Cc: **CALLAHAN, BRIAN** Subject: **RE: ammonia and VOC emissions inventories** Attachments: **winsum__allstates.cy.2007.csv; winsum IN cy 2007.xm l** 

Thank you for exploring this matter proactively. We do find the attached emissions-related information for ammonia and organics to be representative for Indiana, the Central Indiana Region, as well as Indiana’s portio n of the Louisville Area. As such, we request that it be considered a t echnical addendum to Indiana’s Request for Redesign ation and Maintenance Plan for the Annual Fine Particle Stand ard for Central Indiana and Indiana’s potion of the Louisville Area. Although IDEM references 2008 as the base year for both the referenced submittals, the 2007 emissions data for ammonia and organics is deemed to be representative for 2008 as well.

Please feel free to contact me if you need further clarification. Thanks.

From: D'Agostino, Kathleen [ mailto:dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov ] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 12:33 PM To: DELONEY, SCOTT; sagoff, kendra; Aburano, Douglas Subject: ammonia and VOC emissions inventories

As we discussed, LADCO has Excel files on its web p age that contain county level VOC and ammonia emiss ions inventories for 2007. I have attached the complete file as well as a file with only information for t he Indianapolis counties. I would suggest looking over the Indiana polis specific file to ensure that it contains the appropriate data. I have also attached links for the inventory page ( http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/current/index.php ), the county specific file ( http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/basecv8/annual/winsu m__allstates.cy.2007.csv ) and the inventory documentation ( http://www.ladco.org/tech/emis/basecv8/Base_C_Emiss ions_Documentation_Sept_12.pdf ).
The Office of the Clerk of this Court erroneously treated this filing of May 14, 2007 as 1

an attempt to file a new AEDPA petition, and labeled it as 07-cv-1950, when in fact it was part

of 07-cv-1065.

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL NO. 03-cr-795-1

:

v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-cv-1065

:

GEORGE HAMILTON :

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL NO. 03-cr-795-1

:

v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-cv-1950

:

GEORGE HAMILTON :

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

On May 14, 2007, Petitioner responded to this court’s aforesaid Order of April 13, 2007,

by filing using the correct §2255 petition but he did not sign this petition. Petitioner has also 1

applied for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, but although this application is signed by a prison

official, Petitioner himself did not sign this application. 

Accordingly, this ____ Day of June, 2007, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. Document #47 in 03-cr-795-1 is to be marked as also being Document #3 in 07-

cv-1065, and filed in both matters as of May 14, 2007, and the Clerk of this Court

shall cross out all handwritten notations on this document relating to Civil Action

07-cv-1950.

2. 07-cv-1950 is to be marked by the Clerk of this Court as CLOSED for all 

Case 2:03-cr-00795-MMB Document 48 Filed 06/12/07 Page 1 of 2
2

purposes, including statistics. 

3. The Clerk of this Court shall furnish petitioner with a true and accurate photocopy

of Document #47 in 03-cr-795-1.

4. Petitioner shall sign the aforesaid photocopy and return it to Clerk of this Court

within thirty (30) days.

5. Petitioner’s application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis will not be granted

at the present time, and petitioner is formally notified that whereas there is no

filing fee in 28 U.S.C. §2255 cases, that it is not necessary, in any way, for a

petitioner to request leave to proceed in forma pauperis in such a 28 U.S.C. §2255

matter, although a grant of leave to proceed in forma pauperis can entitle a

petitioner to free filing of a notice of appeal in such a matter, if appropriate.

6. Petitioner is formally placed on notice that if he once again insists that 07-cv-1065

proceed as a 28 U.S.C. §2241 petition, that 07-cv-1065 shall be dismissed without

prejudice for seeking relief that is not available pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2241. 

7. Petitioner is formally placed on notice that if he does not comply with this Order

within thirty (30) days, that 07-cv-1065 shall be dismissed without prejudice.

BY THE COURT:

 S/ James T. Giles 

 J.

Case 2:03-cr-00795-MMB Document 48 Filed 06/12/07 Page 2 of 2
# C_2016279EN.01001501.xml

| 1.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/15

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht München (Germany) lodged on 2 May 2016 — Gesellschaft für musikalische Aufführungs- und mechanische Vervielfältigungsrechte, Bezirksdirektion Nürnberg (GEMA) v Josef Ebert

(Case C-252/16)

(2016/C 279/20)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Amtsgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gesellschaft für musikalische Aufführungs- und mechanische Vervielfältigungsrechte, Bezirksdirektion Nürnberg (GEMA)

Applicant:

Defendant: Josef Ebert

Defendant:

By decision of 31 May 2016, the Court removed the case from the Court’s Register

---