alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019155EN.01003702.xml

| 6.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 March 2019 — Inpost Paczkomaty and Inpost v Commission

(Joined Cases T-282/16 and T/283/16) (1)

(State aid - Postal sector - Compensation of the net costs resulting from universal service obligations - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market - Action for annulment - Interest in bringing proceedings - Obligation to state reasons - Equal treatment - Proportionality - Right to property - Freedom to conduct a business)

(2019/C 155/44)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant in Case T-282/16: Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. (Krakow, Poland) (represented by: initially, T. Proć, then D. Doktór, lawyers)

Applicant in Case T-283/16: Inpost S.A. (Krakow, Poland) (represented by: W. Knopkiewicz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann, K. Blanc and D. Recchia, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, Agent)

Re:

Applications based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2015) 8236 final, of 26 November 2015, by which the Commission did not raise objections to the measure notified by the Polish authorities in relation to the aid granted to Poczta Polska in the form of compensation of the net cost resulting from the delivery, by that company, of its universal postal service obligations in respect of the period from and including 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2015.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the actions; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the actions;

| 2. | Declares that Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. and Inpost S.A. are each to bear their own costs and orders them to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Declares that Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. and Inpost S.A. are each to bear their own costs and orders them to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Declares that the Republic of Poland is to pay its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Declares that the Republic of Poland is to pay its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 270, 25.7.2016.

---
# C_2017144EN.01004002.xml

| 8.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 144/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 144/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 22 March 2017 — Hoffmann v EUIPO

(Case T-425/16) (1)

1

((European Union trade mark - Application for EU word mark Genius - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 144/54)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Karl Hoffmann (Bad Schwalbach, Germany) (represented by: C. Jonas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 May 2016 (Case R 1631/2015-5), concerning an application for registration of the word sign Genius as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Karl Hoffmann to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Karl Hoffmann to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 343, 19.9.2016.

1

---
Before the Second Division,

March 25, 1954

No. 57945.

protest 213649-K (New York).

#### John W. Carlson *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

From an examination of the papers in this ease, the court was unable to find anything to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s classification. The protest was therefore overruled. '■
<TABLE> <S> <C>

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

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           3,012
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,608
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,662)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,774
<PP&E>                                          15,381
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,800)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  27,737
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,132
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            65
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,522)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    27,737
<SALES>                                          6,369
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,369
<CGS>                                            5,928
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,928
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,359
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,892)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,424)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,469)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,469)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.16)


</TABLE>
(Reap. Dec. 10957)

#### Thrifty Equipment Co. T. D. Downing Co. v. United States

Entry No. 15142.

(Decided April 20, 1965)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiffs.

*Jolm W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

The following appeal for reappraisement is before me for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, as follows:

> 1. That the merchandise the subject of the entitled appeal consists of D-8 Track Link Assembly made up of 39 links each, exported from England on or about January 1958.

> *6262. That this stipulation is limited to the D-8 Track Link Assembly; that as so limited the merchandise and the issues are the same in all material respects as those involved in *The Thrifty Equipment Co., T. D. Downing Co.*v. *United States,*Reap. Dec. 10674, and that the record in the cited case may be incorporated in the record herein.

> 3. That during the period in question, such merchandise was freely offered for sale *to*all purchasers for home consumption in the principal markets of England, in the ordinary course of trade, at £160.0.0, said price not varying with the quantities purchased.

> 4. That such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale to all purchasers for exportation to the United States during the period in question.

> 5. That the appeal may be submitted upon this stipulation, the same being limited to the D-8 Track Link Assembly, and abandoned in all other respects.

On the agreed facts and following the cited decision on the law, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise covered by this appeal is foreign value, as defined in section 402(c), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, and that such value is £160.0.0 for each assembly, and I so hold.

This appeal is abandoned hi all other respects.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 53951.

#### Hensel Bruckmann & Lorbacher, Inc., and S. B. Weintraub *v.*United States,

protests 146751-K and 150272-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of sisal handbags similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Goldberg & Seltzer, Inc.*(36 C. C. P. A. 64, C. A. D. 399), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
# C_2017070EN.01001001.xml

| 6.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 70/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70/10

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 12 December 2016 — Tünkers France, Tünkers Maschinenbau GmbH v Expert France

(Case C-641/16)

(2017/C 070/15)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Tünkers France, Tünkers Maschinenbau GmbH

Applicants:

Defendant: Expert France

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings (1) be interpreted as meaning that the court which opened insolvency proceedings has exclusive jurisdiction over an action seeking to establish liability by which the assignee of part of a business acquired in the course of those insolvency proceedings is accused of misrepresenting itself as the exclusive distributor or the goods manufactured by the debtor?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2000 L 160, p. 1.

1

---
**EXHIBIT        32.1 **

**CERTIFICATE        PURSUANT TO**

**18        U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | 1. | the                  Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or                  15(d), as                  applicable, 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 result of operations of the                  Company                  at the dates and for the period                  indicated. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                    |                                                                               |                                |
|-----------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|
|                                    |                                                                                    |
|                               |                                                                          |                           |
| Dated:                November 21, 2005 | By:                                                                      | /s/ Bruce                Mogel |
|                                    | Bruce                Mogel                Chief                  Executive Officer |
|                                    |                                                                               |

----
# Mar

# image1.jpg
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DEBRA A. LEARNED : CIVIL ACTION

:

 v. :

:

JO ANNE B. BARNHART : No. 04-4680 

ORDER

AND NOW, this 1st day of August, 2005, upon

consideration of plaintiff's motion for summary judgment (docket

entry # 8), defendant's motion for summary judgment (docket entry

# 9), plaintiff's reply (docket entry # 11), the Report and

Recommendation of the Honorable Peter B. Scuderi, and the

Government's failure to object within ten days of service of the

Report and Recommendation, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)

and the June 27, 2005 letter sent to it by the Clerk of Court,

thereby preventing us from executing our congressionally

entrusted task, i.e., "make a de novo determination of those

portions of the report or specified proposed findings or

recommendations to which objection is made," id., it is hereby

ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and

ADOPTED;

2. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is

GRANTED; 

3. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is DENIED;

and

4. The decision of the Commissioner that denied

disability insurance benefits is VACATED, and in accordance with

the fourth sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), this case is REMANDED

Case 2:04-cv-04680-SD Document 13 Filed 08/02/05 Page 1 of 2
-2-

to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with the

Report and Recommendation. 

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Stewart Dalzell, J. 

Case 2:04-cv-04680-SD Document 13 Filed 08/02/05 Page 2 of 2
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 60409 Summary Calendar

JOHN OKELLO OBIERO ,
Petitioner

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL , Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A096 683 875

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Kenyan citizen John Okello Obiero petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his motion for reconsideration and reopening following the denial of his motion for a
continuanc e in his removal proceeding to allow for the consideration of a petition for an alien filed by his wife on his behalf.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED January 16, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-60409 Document: 00512503620 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/16/2014N o. 13

- 60409

Obiero contends that the BIA’s decision denying a continuance was erroneous in numerous respects. He raises no specific issues as to t he evidence presented in support of his motion to reopen. He does not argue that the BIA erred by denying the motion for reconsideration on the basis that he raised issues that already had been raised or could have been raised in his previous
administrati ve appeal. Obiero is represented by counsel, and his brief is not
entitled to liberal construction. See Woodfox v. Cain , 609 F.3d 774, 792 (5th Cir. 2010). He has failed to brief the relevant issues for this court’s consideration as to the motion for reconsideration or reopening. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 Case: 13-60409 Document: 00512503620 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/16/2014
**40**

**42**

**2**

# INTRODUCTION: Ownership of Federal Securities

Federal securities presented in the following tables are public debt securities such as savings bonds, bills, notes, and bonds that the Treasury issues. The tables also detail debt issued by other Federal agencies under special financing authorities. [See the Federal debt (FD) tables for a more complete description of the Federal debt.]

Effective January 1, 2001, Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service revised formats, titles, and column headings in the “Monthly Statement of the Public Debt of the United States,” Table I: Summary of Treasury Securities Outstanding and Table II: Statutory Debt Limit. These changes should reduce confusion and bring the publication more in line with the public’s use of terms.

Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service compiles data in the “Treasury Bulletin” table OFS-1 from the “Monthly Statement of the Public Debt of the United States.” Effective June 2001, Bureau of the Fiscal Service revised procedures and categories in this table to agree with the Bureau of the Fiscal Service’s publication changes.

· Table **OFS-1** presents Treasury marketable and nonmarketable securities and debt issued by other Federal agencies held by Government accounts, the FRBs, and private investors. Social Security and Federal retirement trust fund investments comprise much of the Government account holdings.

The FRBs acquire Treasury securities in the market as a means of executing monetary policy.

· Table **OFS-2** presents the estimated ownership of U.S. Treasury securities. Information is primarily obtained from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors Flow of Funds data, Table L209. State, local, and foreign holdings include special issues of nonmarketable securities to municipal entities and foreign official accounts. They also include municipal, foreign official, and private holdings of marketable Treasury securities. (See footnotes to the table for description of investor categories.)

*June 2018*
Exhibit 10.7





RESOLUTION OF





THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS





OF





RTG VENTURES  INC





The following is a true copy of the resolution duly adopted by the Board of Directors of this Corporation at a special meeting, notice to this meeting having been waived, held this December 9th, 2011.




The Board of Directors who were present for this meeting & took active part therein were:





LINDA PERRY


NEIL GRAY


REGGIE JAMES





WHEREAS there has been presented to and considered by this meeting a Motion to Rescind the previously executed Share Purchase Agreement with Bitemark MC Ltd of 3rd September, 2010;





WHEREAS said Agreement was premised upon maintenance of assets and certain performances of profit margin on the part of Bitemark MC Ltd;





WHEREAS no such maintanence of the assets nor production of any profit has ensued, to the point of filing of Liquidation on the part of Bitemark; no consideration at all having been tendered on the part of Bitemark MC Ltd;





NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the corporation having considered this matter, has opened the floor to all those who voice a preference in the issue, has decided unanimously and RESOLVED that:





Said Share Purchase Agreement, as well as ALL obligations and commitments between the companies are now hereby RECSINDED nunc pro tunc leaving the companies in a state of equipoise as was prior to the first Agreement signed between them.





Note additionally that the 236,228 Preferred Shares reserved for Bitemark shall herewith be returned to Treasury.





Said Motion is hereby passed and the corporate books, records and the secretary shall file this Resolution in the corporate records.







DATED: December 9th, 2011







____________________


David E. Price, Secretary
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 10196 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. RAUL RAFAEL MORALES

- SANCHEZ, als o known as Anthony C. Jaramillo , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:13

- CR

- 50

- 1

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Raul Rafael Morales

- Sanchez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Morales

- Sanchez h a s filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Morales

- Sanchez’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel; we therefore

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED March 16, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-10196 Document: 00512969977 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/16/2015No. 14

- 10196
decline to consider the claim without pr ejudice to collateral review. See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 123 (2014)

. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein , as well as Morales

- Sanchez’s response . We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSE D. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 14-10196 Document: 00512969977 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/16/2015
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying amended annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Genesis Realty Group, Inc. for the Year Ended December 31, 2004, I, Jeffrey Glick, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Genesis Realty Group, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

 

1.     Such amended annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004, 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 such amended annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Genesis Realty Group, Inc.

 
| Dated: January 5 | 2006 |
|------------------|------|

 

**GENESIS REALTY GROUP, INC.**

 
| By: | */s/ Jeffrey Glick* |
|-----|---------------------|

Chief Executive Officer and

Chief Financial Office
Exhibit 4.1


 


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


240 Greenwich
Street, 22W Floor, New York, NY 10286


 


 


 


March 2, 2021


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


SmartTrust 508 (the “Fund”)


 


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York
Mellon is acting as trustee for the Fund, consisting of the unit investment trust (the “Trust”) included in
the Registration Statement relating to the Fund. We enclosed a list of the securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date
hereof. The prices indicated therein reflect our evaluation of such securities as of close of business on March 1, 2021, in accordance
with the valuation method set forth in the applicable Standard Terms and Conditions of Trust and Trust Agreement. We consent to
the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing the evaluations of the Trust securities in the Registration
Statement (No. 333-251360) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission with respect to the registration of the sale of the
Units of the Trust and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	/s/ GERARDO CIPRIANO
	 	Gerardo Cipriano
	 	Vice President
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 94 Filed 12/29/2008 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 94 Filed 12/29/2008 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 94 Filed 12/29/2008 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 94 Filed 12/29/2008 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 94 Filed 12/29/2008 Page 5 of 5