alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016191EN.01001201.xml

| 30.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 191/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 191/12

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Mons (Belgium) lodged on 4 March 2016 — Christian Ferenschild v JPC Motor SA

(Case C-133/16)

(2016/C 191/14)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour d’appel de Mons

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Christian Ferenschild

Applicant:

Defendant: JPC Motor SA

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Article 5(1) of Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees, in conjunction with the second subparagraph of Article 7(1) thereof, (1) be interpreted as precluding a provision of national law which is interpreted as allowing, for second-hand goods, the limitation period for action by the consumer to expire before the end of the two-year period as from delivery of goods which are not in conformity with the contract, where the seller and the consumer have agreed on a guarantee period of less than two years?

1

---

(1)  OJ 1999 L 171, p. 12.

1

---
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 1SUPPLEMENT	&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2017 ReportingSection VII

&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000Draft&K000000 Bulletin No. 2017-06	&"Arial,Bold"VII ESR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 04-20-17
EXHIBIT 32.3

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, David K. Spohr, Vice President and Director of Fund Administration of the Managing Owner, Preferred
Investment Solutions Corp. (the Managing Owner), of World Monitor Trust  Series A (Series A), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | Series As Quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Quarterly
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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Series A.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------
|/s/ David K. Spohr                                
|David K. Spohr                                    
|Vice President and Director of Fund Administration
|August 14, 2006
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 the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust IV (the "Trust") and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding IV, L.P.
for the period ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marlene Debel,
Regular Trustee of the Trust, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
    of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.





                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST IV


                              By:  /s/ MARLENE DEBEL
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    Marlene Debel *
                              Title:   Regular Trustee









Dated: November 13, 2009
------------------------

* Marlene Debel functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
  and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Trust for  purposes  of Section  906
  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**469 KA 12-01851**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MICHAEL A. DOBLINGER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 2.)

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (BARBARA J. DAVIES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
FRANK A. SEDITA, III, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BUFFALO (DAVID A. HERATY OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (M. William Boller, A.J.), rendered August 16, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Same Memorandum as in People v Doblinger ([appeal No. 1] ___ AD3d ___ [May 2, 2014]).

Entered: May 2, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT 31.2

Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

I, Bonnie M. Klein, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of BCSB Bankcorp, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying
officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date: July 16, 2007



/s/ Bonnie M. KleinBonnie M. KleinSenior Vice President and Treasurer(Principal Financial Officer)
No. 51317.

#### Petition 6534-R of J. S. Holquin and Henry W. Peabody & Co. of California (El Paso).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

The petition was dismissed.
No. 59483.

protests 258632-K, etc. (New York).

#### Durlacher & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of silk scarves or squares similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *The Specialty House, Inc., Bryant & Heffernan, Inc., et al.*(42 C. C. P. A. 136, C. A. *D.*585), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<PAGE>
Exhibit 11
Earnings Per Share

                                                   Three months ended
                                                       March 31,
                                                    2002         2001
                                                 ---------     --------
     Numerator:
          Net income                             $ 127,501     $ 76,837

     Denominator:
          Denominator for basic earnings per
              share--weighted-average shares       388,052      388,052

          Effect of dilutive securities:
              Nonqualified stock options             7,530        7,530
                                                 ---------     --------
          Denominator for diluted earnings
              per share                            395,582      395,582
                                                 =========     ========

     Basic earnings per share                    $    0.33     $   0.20
                                                 =========     ========

     Diluted earnings per share                  $    0.32     $   0.19
                                                 =========     ========
EX-12
                              RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                          EXHIBIT 12


                                                             MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST III
                                                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING III, L.P.
                                                               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO
                                                   COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED SECURITIES DISTRIBUTIONS
                                                                    (dollars in thousands)


                                             FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED               FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                   MARCH 30, 2001                           MARCH 31, 2001
                                          ----------------------------------       ----------------------------------
                                          MERRILL LYNCH     MERRILL LYNCH          MERRILL LYNCH        MERRILL LYNCH
                                           PREFERRED         PREFERRED               PREFERRED            PREFERRED
                                         CAPITAL TRUST III   FUNDING III, L.P.    CAPITAL TRUST III    FUNDING III, L.P.
                                         -----------------  -----------------     -----------------    ----------------
<S>                                        <C>                <C>                   <C>                <C>
Earnings                                    $ 13,531           $ 15,901              $ 13,531           $ 15,880
                                            ========           ========              ========           ========



Fixed charges                               $      -           $      -              $      -           $      -

Preferred securities distribution
  requirements                                13,125             13,531                13,125             13,531
                                            --------           --------              --------           --------

Total combined fixed charges and
  preferred securities distributions        $ 13,125           $ 13,531              $ 13,125           $ 13,531
                                            ========           ========              ========           ========

Ratio of earnings to combined
  fixed charges and preferred
  securities distributions                      1.03               1.18                  1.03               1.17




</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WILLIAM A. GRAHAM COMPANY : CIVIL ACTION

d/b/a THE GRAHAM COMPANY :

:

v. :

:

THOMAS P. HAUGHEY, et al. : NO. 05-612

ORDER

AND NOW, this 30th day of June, 2011, for the 

reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby

ORDERED that:

(1) the motion of defendants Thomas P. Haughey and USI

MidAtlantic, Inc. "to extend stay of execution proceedings and to

approve amount of bond" (Docket No. 297) is DENIED; and

(2) the "emergency motion" of said defendants to "to

extend stay of execution proceedings" (Docket No. 298) is DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Harvey Bartle III 

 J.
2 4 September 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave

. , SE

Washington

, DC 20590

Re: Petition for Amendment to Exemption No. 12940 Issued to ISight RPV Services, LLC

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Reform A ct and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(Docket No. FAA

- 2015

- 2295)

Dear Sir or Madam:

ISight RPV Services , LLC ( herein referred to as ISight) was issued Exemption No. 12940

( herein referred to as Exemption”) on September 21, 2015, allowing com mercial operatio ns of

the Aeryon SkyRanger UAS

.

ISight requests an amendment to the Exemption to allow commercial operation of the additional

UAS shown in Appendix A, so long as such operations are conducted within and under the

conditions of the Exemptio n.

All of the UAS shown in Appendix A have been previously approved under Section 333

Exemptions. Due to this fact, ISight contends that this amendment petition is non

- controversial

and we respectfully request that it be approved summarily.

Best Regard s

,

Mr. Nathaniel A. Leben

ISight RPV Services, LLC

.Appendix A: Additional UAS for Amendment to Exemption No. 12940

1. Aeryon Scout

2. AeroVironment Shrike

3. AeroVironment Puma

4. Altavian Nova F6500

5. Altavian Nova R8400

6. DJI Ins pire

7. DJI Inspire 1

8. DJI Inspire 2

9 . DJI Phantom 2+

10 . DJI Phantom 2 Vision

11 . DJI Phantom 2 Vision+

12 . DJI Phantom Vision +

13 . DJI Phantom 3

14 . DJI Phantom FC40

15 . DJI Spreading Wings S900

16 . DJI Spreading Wings S1000

17 . DJI Spreading Wings S 1000+

18 . DJI S800

19 . DJI S800 EVO

20 . DJI T600

21 . Draganflyer Guardian

22 . Draganflyer X4ES

23 . Draganflyer X4P

24 . Draganflyer X6

25 . Lockheed Martin Desert Hawk III

26. Lockheed Martin Indago

27 . Nighthawk

2 8. Nighthawk VTOL

29 . PrecisionHawk Hawkeye Mk

- III

30 . PrecisionHawk Lancaster

31 . Precision Lancaster MK3

32 . SenseFly eBee

33 . SenseFly eBee RTK

3 4. SenseFly eXom

3 5. Sensurion Magpie MP

- 1

3 6. Service

- Drone Recon One

37 . Trimble UX5

38 . Trimble UX5 hp

39 . Trimble ZX5

40 . 2AgEagle

41 . 3D Robotics A ero

- M

42 . 3D Robotics Iris43. 3D Robotics Iris+

44 . 3D Robotics X8

45 . 3DRobotics Fixed Wing

46 . 3DRobotics Multirotor

47 . 3DRobotics Quadrotor

48 . 3DR Solo

49 . 3DR Spektre

50 . 3DRobotics Spektre Industrial Multi

- Rotor Aerial Vehicle

51 . 3D Robotics Solo

52 . 3DRobotics X8+

53 . 3D Robotics X8

- M

54 . 3D Robotics Y6
Case 2:02-cv-04393-JS Document 38 Filed 12/02/2004 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:02-cv-04393-JS Document 38 Filed 12/02/2004 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:02-cv-04393-JS Document 38 Filed 12/02/2004 Page 3 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

REGINALD SANDERS, : CIVIL ACTION 

:

Petitioner, :

:

v. :

:

EDWARD KLEM, et al., :

:

Respondents : NO. 05-1688

 

ORDER

AND NOW, this 14th day of November, 2007, upon careful and independent

consideration of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus of Reginald Sanders (Docket No. 1); the

Government’s response thereto (Docket No. 7); Petitioner’s reply (Docket No. 10); the Report

and Recommendation of the Honorable Linda K. Caracappa, United States Magistrate Judge

(Docket No. 11); and Petitioner’s objections thereto (Docket No. 14), it is hereby ORDERED

that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED.

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED and DISMISSED.

3. Petitioner’s objections are DENIED.

4. A Certificate of Appealability is GRANTED as to the issue of whether, in light of

United States v. Richards, 241 F.3d 335 (3d Cir. 2001) and Priester v. Vaughn,

382 F.3d 394 (3d Cir. 2004), the admission of out-of-court statements made by a

co-defendant violated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment.

Case 2:05-cv-01688-GEKP Document 17 Filed 11/19/07 Page 1 of 2
2

5. The Clerk of the Court shall CLOSE this case for all purposes, including statistics.

BY THE COURT:

S/Gene E.K. Pratter

GENE E.K. PRATTER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-01688-GEKP Document 17 Filed 11/19/07 Page 2 of 2
Case 2:00-cv-05784-PBT Document 35 Filed 02/01/06 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:00-cv-05784-PBT Document 35 Filed 02/01/06 Page 2 of 2
Before the Second Division,

September 10, 1948

No. 52537.

protests 82633-K, etc. (Boston and Cleveland).

#### C. H. Powell Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
Document

EXHIBIT 10.100


AMENDMENT
TO THE
POSTRETIREMENT LIFE INSURANCE PLAN OF
THE PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 


A.          Adoption and effective date of amendment.  This Amendment to the Postretirement Life Insurance Plan of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the “Plan”) is adopted by the Employee Benefit Committee of PG&E Corporation pursuant to its authority set forth in the Plan.  This Amendment shall be effective as of January 1, 2019.


B.           Supersession of inconsistent provisions.  This Amendment shall supersede the provisions of the Plan to the extent those provisions are inconsistent with the provisions of this Amendment.


C.           Section 3.02C(a) of the Plan is amended to read as follows:


(a)       Composition of the Employee Benefit Committee.  The Chief Financial Officer of PG&E Corporation, the General Counsel of PG&E Corporation and the Executive Vice President, Corporate Services and Human Resources, of PG&E Corporation shall be members of the EMPLOYEE BENEFIT COMMITTEE and shall designate up to three additional members of the EMPLOYEE BENEFIT COMMITTEE who shall be officers or employees of PG&E Corporation or its subsidiaries.  If there is no Executive Vice President, Corporate Services and Human Resources of PG&E Corporation, then the senior most human resources officer of the COMPANY (or, if such role is vacant, the equivalent position at PG&E Corporation) will instead be a member of the EMPLOYEE BENEFIT COMMITTEE.  The EMPLOYEE BENEFIT COMMITTEE shall designate one of its members to serve as its Chairman.




The foregoing amendment was duly adopted by the Employee Benefit Committee on February__28__, 2019, pursuant to the authority described above. 


/s/ JASON P. WELLS
                                                                                    
Jason P. Wells
Chairman, Employee Benefit Committee




            4/30/19                                                            
Date
No. 66295.

#### General Wine & Spirits Company *v.*United States,

protest 61/3405 (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Since the protest was filed more than 60 days after liquidation, it was dismissed as untimely, by virtue of section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.
Se IPAC

‘SrsTeM

IPAC Operational Metrics for November 2022

Volume by Transaction Type
Dollar Amount] % of Total Dollar Amount| Number of Transactions] _% of Total Number of Transactions!
Fiduciary (Investment & Borrowing) 23,544, 845,467,033 99.76% 23,661 19.51%)
Buy/Sell 47,102,466,682| 0.20% 96,385] 79.46%
Benefits (RITS) 9,771,191,951| 0.04%) 419) 0.35%
‘Check Aftermath (TRACS) 276,276,342| 0.00%| 829] 0.68%
Zero Dollar 0 0.00% | 0.00%|
[Grand Total - November 2022 23,601,995,402,008| 10.00% 321,294] 100.00%|
| Grand Total - October 2022 23,655,431,055,470| 100.00%| 116,224) 100.00%|
[October to November Change -53,435,653,462 | tTM~—‘CC*#SS;«OTAOY
Percentage Change 0.2% po af
—
[Grand Total - November 2021 11,969,744,324,191| [si 33]
Nov 2021 to Nov 2022 Change 11,632,251,077,817,
Percentage Change 97.2%
# C_2015262EN.01003101.xml

| 10.8.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/31

---

Action brought on 24 April 2015 — Dôvera zdravotná poist'ovňa/Commission

(Case T-216/15)

(2015/C 262/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Dôvera zdravotná poist'ovňa, s.a. (Bratislava, Slovakia) (represented by: O. Brouwer and A. Pliego Selie, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the Commission Decision (EU) 2015/248 of 15 October 2014 on the measures SA.23008 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) implemented by the Slovak Republic for Spoločná zdravotná poisťovňa, a. s. (SZP) and Všeobecná zdravotná poisťovňa, a. s. (VZP) (notified under document C(2014) 7277) (OJ 2015 L 41, p. 25); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Commission Decision (EU) 2015/248 of 15 October 2014 on the measures SA.23008 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN) implemented by the Slovak Republic for Spoločná zdravotná poisťovňa, a. s. (SZP) and Všeobecná zdravotná poisťovňa, a. s. (VZP) (notified under document C(2014) 7277) (OJ 2015 L 41, p. 25);

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the procedure. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the procedure.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging a misapplication of Article 107 (1) TFEU






  — | The Commission has erred in law by misapplying the concept of undertaking in the specific context of Article 107 (1) TFEU. |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging a misapplication of Article 107 (1) TFEU

—

The Commission has erred in law by misapplying the concept of undertaking in the specific context of Article 107 (1) TFEU.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging errors of law and manifest errors of assessment






  — | The Commission has, in setting and applying the criteria to determine the economic nature of the insurance scheme, committed errors of law and manifest errors of assessment in finding that SZP/VZP does not qualify as an undertaking and failed to provide adequate reasoning. |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging errors of law and manifest errors of assessment

—

The Commission has, in setting and applying the criteria to determine the economic nature of the insurance scheme, committed errors of law and manifest errors of assessment in finding that SZP/VZP does not qualify as an undertaking and failed to provide adequate reasoning.

---
No. 64778.

#### Frankel Associates, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/1043, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, O. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fiber or hemp articles similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 63552, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.