alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017151EN.01003402.xml

| 15.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 151/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 151/34

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 April 2017 — Germany v Commission

(Case T-28/16) (1)

1

((EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Rural development - Land consolidation and village renewal - Criteria used for selection of operations - Principle of sincere cooperation - Subsidiarity - Legitimate expectations - Proportionality - Obligation to state reasons))

(2017/C 151/44)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented: initially by T. Henze and A. Lippstreu, and subsequently by T. Henze and D. Klebs, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Aquilina and B. Eggers, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Article 1 and the Annex of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2015/2098, of 13 November 2015, excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2015 L 303, p. 35), in so far as the payments made by the agency responsible for payment in the Federal Republic of Germany under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), in the total amount of EUR 7 719 920,30, are excluded from EU financing.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 98, 14.3.2016.

1

---
# C_2016454EN.01001702.xml

| 5.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 454/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 454/17

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale della Campania (Italy) lodged on 14 September 2016 — Sicurbau Srl and Others v Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti and Others

(Case C-493/16)

(2016/C 454/31)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale della Campania

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Sicurbau Srl, IGR — Imprese Generali Riunite Srl, Iterga Costruzioni Generali SpA, Pa.Co. — Pacifico Costruzioni SpA

Defendants: Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti, Autorità Portuale di Napoli, Soa Rina SpA

Question referred

Do the Community principles of the protection of legitimate expectations and legal certainty, together with the principles of the free movement of goods, the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services, laid down in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as well as the principles deriving therefrom, such as equality of treatment, non-discrimination, mutual recognition, proportionality and transparency, referred to (most recently) in Directive 2014/24/EU, (1) preclude national legislation, such as the Italian legislation founded on the combined provisions of Articles 87(4) and 86(3 bis) of Legislative Decree No 163 of 2006 and Article 26(6) of Legislative Decree No 81 of 2008, as interpreted, with a view to securing proper respect for, and uniform application of, the law, pursuant to Article 99 of the Code of Administrative Procedure, by judgments No 3 and No 9 of 2015 of the Plenary Assembly of the Consiglio di Stato, according to which the failure to list the corporate safety and security costs separately in tenders in a procedure for the award of a public works contract inevitably results in the exclusion of the tendering undertaking concerned, even in the case where the obligation to list that information separately was not set out in the tender rules, and even though, in substantive terms, the tender in question took into account the minimum costs of corporate safety and security?

---

(1)  Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ 2014 L 94, p. 65).

---
Before the Third Division,

April 5, 1960

No. 64060.

protests 715783-G, etc. (San Francisco).

#### Canada Dry Ginger Ale Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Richardson, 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.
POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

None.

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW: No
Drone IT 180-5 

# CHARACTERISTICS

Helicopter drone with counter-rotating rotors

17, rue Ampère - 91300 Massy ( fr a nce) Tel. : +33 1 60 13 66 00 - F ax : +33 1 60 13 66 10 

### drone@infotron.fr - www.infotron.fr IT180-5 TH IT180-5 EL

Motorization 46cm 3 two-stroke Brushless DC

R otor diameter 1,80 m Total mass (loaded) 19 Kg 17 Kg Total mass (unloaded) 14 Kg 14 Kg Payload 5 Kg 3 Kg Maximum airspeed 90 Km/h

Maximum altitude 3000 m

E ndurance 90 minutes 30 minutes

Pilot modes Manual, Automatic, Land monitoring

R adio link 41 MHz – 72 MHz - 2,4 GHz

Automatic functions Takeoff, Flight, Landing

### ENVIRONMENT Location of pollution sources Surveillance of fires
Protection of coastlines



### INFORMATION AND SERVICES HD photography and video in real-time

C artography 

### VIDEOSURVEILLANCE

Gyrostabilized or fixed day-night video camera Variable focal length
O n-board video compressor
R eal-time downlink and/or on-board storage Manual or pre-programmed flight 

### INDUSTRY
Site surveillance

Inspection of civil engineering
structures Inspection of High Voltage power lines

R adiation measurement Aeromagnetism 

### CIVIL AND MILITARY SECURITY
Border control Guerilla, clandestine laboratories Triggering of avalanches
Human Search and R escue Identification of ships

Uxo detection 

# Configurations...

...adapted to your assignments

PERSONALIZED CONFIGURATIONS Adaptation of all types of payloads Support for hardware and software integration Specific developments 

### INSPECTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERING STRUCTURES AND CLIFFS High resolution camera

Photography – automatic and/or manual shots Display of visual field in real time Troubleshooting using software*

(*Partnership with the firm)
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2011-0025

Directorate Identifier: 2010NM208AD

MPD D622W001-9 --- 1/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-40653

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RENATO VILLARREAL,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-96-CR-066-02

- - - - - - - - - -

April 15, 1997

Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Renato Villarreal appeals his sentence following his guiltyplea conviction for conspiracy to possess with the intent to

distribute heroin. He argues that the district court erred by

refusing to apply the safety-valve provision, pursuant to 18

U.S.C. § 3553(f) and U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2. We have reviewed the

record and the briefs on appeal and detect no error. United

States v. Edwards, 65 F.3d 430, 433 (5th Cir. 1995).
No.

- 2 -

AFFIRMED.
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 1 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 2 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 3 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 4 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 5 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 6 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 7 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 8 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 9 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 10 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 11 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 12 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 13 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 14 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 15 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 16 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 17 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 18 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 19 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 20 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 21 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 22 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 23 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 24 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 25 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 26 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 27 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 28 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 29 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 30 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 31 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 32 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 33 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 34 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 35 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 36 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 37 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 38 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 39 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 40 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 41 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 42 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 43 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 44 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 45 of 46
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 138 Filed 09/30/2003 Page 46 of 46
Exhibit 10.1 


TERMINATION OF EQUITY DISTRIBUTION
AGREEMENT


This Termination of Equity Distribution
Agreement (this “Agreement”), dated as of March 2, 2021, is made by and between PLx Pharma Inc. (the “Company”),
and JMP Securities LLC (“JMP,” and, together with the Company, each a “Party” and collectively,
the “Parties”).


WHEREAS, JMP and the Company are
party to that certain Equity Distribution Agreement, dated as of March 25, 2019 (the “Equity Distribution Agreement”),
pursuant to which JMP acted as a placement agent on behalf of the Company; and


WHEREAS, the Company desires to
terminate the Equity Distribution Agreement in its entirety pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Equity Distribution Agreement.


NOW THEREFORE, in consideration
of the mutual promises made herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the
Parties hereby agree as follows:


1.       Termination.
Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Equity Distribution Agreement, this Agreement shall act as notice to JMP of the Company’s
termination of the Equity Distribution Agreement.


2.       Entire
Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the full and complete understanding and agreement between the Parties with regard to
the subject matter hereof. This Agreement may not be amended, waived, discharged or terminated other than by a written instrument
signed by both Parties hereto.


3.       Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, and each counterpart shall have the same force and effect as an original and shall
constitute an effective, binding agreement on the part of each of the undersigned Parties.


4.       Governing
Law. This Agreement will be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of Delaware applicable to
contracts executed in and to be performed entirely within that State, without reference to conflicts of law provisions.


[Signature Page Follows]



     


     


    

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have
executed this Agreement as of date first above written.


 


	 	PLX PHARMA INC.
	 	 
	 	By:	
        /s/ Natasha
        Giordano

	 	 	Name:	Natasha Giordano 
	 	 	Title:	President & Chief Executive Officer


 


	 	
        ACCEPTED AND AGREED:

        JMP SECURITIES LLC

	 	 
	 	By:	
        /s/ Walter Conroy

	 	 	Name:	Walter Conroy
	 	 	Title:	Chief Legal Officer and Secretary
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

NOTICE REGARDING EFFECTIVE DATE

(June 14, 2013)

On May 16, 2013, the Commission issued a Final Rule in Docket            No. RM12-15-000 (May 16, 2013 Order).  The May 16, 2013 Order stated that the Final Rule would be effective on June 28, 2013.  However, the information collection requirements in the Final Rule must receive clearance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  We will grant an indefinite extension of time for compliance with the Final Rule pending OMB action and pending a subsequent notice from the Commission.    

  For further information contact Aaron Kahn, (202) 502-8339, aaron.kahn@ferc.gov.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary.

� Filing, Indexing and Service Requirements for Oil Pipelines, Order No. 780, 78 Fed. Reg. 32090 (May 29, 2013).
# C_2016371EN.01003201.xml

| 10.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 371/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 371/32

---

Action brought on 17 August 2016 — ZZ v EIB

(Case F-45/16)

(2016/C 371/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: B. Maréchal, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Investment Bank (EIB)

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Claim for compensation in respect of the material and non-material loss that the applicant maintains he has suffered following the declaration of his total and permanent invalidity, which he regards as being of occupational origin.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

Compensate the applicant for the loss or for part of the loss in the case in which part of the loss would have been reimbursed by the EIB's AXA Belgium insurance.

| — | Damages in relation to the violation of the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant amounting to EUR 150 000; |
| --- | --- |

—

Damages in relation to the violation of the moral prejudice suffered by the applicant amounting to EUR 150 000;

| — | Reimbursement of future medical and psychological costs related to the health issues developed due to the severe stress of the applicant, and which is not reimbursed by the EIB Health Insurance Scheme; |
| --- | --- |

—

Reimbursement of future medical and psychological costs related to the health issues developed due to the severe stress of the applicant, and which is not reimbursed by the EIB Health Insurance Scheme;

| — | Reimbursement of medical and psychological costs to date related to the health issues developed due to the severe stress, and which is not reimbursed by the IB Health Insurance Scheme; |
| --- | --- |

—

Reimbursement of medical and psychological costs to date related to the health issues developed due to the severe stress, and which is not reimbursed by the IB Health Insurance Scheme;

| — | Repayment of the applicant’s legal fees for the current proceedings amounting to a provisional amount of EUR 30 000. |
| --- | --- |

—

Repayment of the applicant’s legal fees for the current proceedings amounting to a provisional amount of EUR 30 000.

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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
   This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the 
Balance Sheet at September 30, 1998 (Unaudited) and the Statements of Operations
for the nine months ended September 30, 1998 (Unaudited) and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.  
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                              <C>                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1998           DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                        JAN-01-1998           JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                          SEP-30-1998           SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                        789                   789
<SECURITIES>                                    0                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   0                     0
<ALLOWANCES>                                    0                     0
<INVENTORY>                                     0                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                0                     0
<PP&E>                                    230,576               230,576
<DEPRECIATION>                            (20,196)              (20,196)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            225,113               225,113
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           0                     0
<BONDS>                                   142,000               142,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0                     0
<PREFERRED>                                     0                     0
<COMMON>                                        0                     0
<OTHER-SE>                                 77,173                77,173
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              225,113               225,113
<SALES>                                     9,715                28,757
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            9,819                29,092
<CGS>                                       3,715                10,608
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               3,715                10,608
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            2,736                 8,120
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          2,268                 6,894
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             1,100                 3,470
<INCOME-TAX>                                    0                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         1,100                 3,470
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0                   (86)
<CHANGES>                                       0                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                1,100                 3,384
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   0                     0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0                     0
        


</TABLE>
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2010-0488 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2008-SW-20-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. 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 same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. 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 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 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 with 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, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
# C_2017283EN.01001101.xml

| 28.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 283/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 283/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 28 June 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Areios Pagos — Greece) — Georgios Leventis, Nikolaos Vafeias v Malcon Navigation Co. ltd., Brave Bulk Transport ltd

(Case C-436/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 23 - Jurisdiction clause - Jurisdiction clause in a contract between two companies - Action for damages - Joint and several liability of representatives of one of those companies for tortious acts - Ability of the representatives to rely upon that clause))

(2017/C 283/15)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Referring court

Areios Pagos

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Georgios Leventis, Nikolaos Vafeias

Applicants:

Defendants: Malcon Navigation Co. ltd., Brave Bulk Transport ltd

Defendants:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 23(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that a jurisdiction clause in a contract between two companies cannot be relied upon by the representatives of one of them to dispute the jurisdiction of a court over an action for damages which aims to render them jointly and severally liable for supposedly tortious acts carried out in the performance of their duties.

---

(1)  OJ C 392, 24.10.2016.

1

---
Case 2:05-cv-00417-MAM Document 251 Filed 01/04/10 Page 1 of 1