alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007235EN.01001201.xml

| 6.10.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/12

---

Action brought on 26 July 2007 — Rajani (Dear!Net Online) v OHIM — Artoz-Papier (ATOZ)

(Case T-100/06)

(2007/C 235/21)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Deepak Rajani (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Dustmann, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Artoz-Papier AG (Lenzburg, Switzerland)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 January 2006 (case R 1126/2004-2) |
| --- | --- |

—

Annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 11 January 2006 (case R 1126/2004-2)

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: Deepak Rajani

Applicant for the Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The Community word mark ‘ATOZ’ for services in classes 35 and 41 — application No 1 319 961

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Artoz-Papier AG

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited: The international and national word mark ‘ARTOZ’ for services in classes 35 and 41

Mark or sign cited:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: The applicant alleges that the contested decision was rendered in violation of Article 43(2) and (3) of the CTMR insofar as it adopted an undue interpretation of the trademark's registration term. According to the applicant such ultra vires interpretation of Community, national and international laws amounts to a misuse of power. Furthermore, the applicant claims that the Board's decision is in breach of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR. Finally, the applicant contends that both the opposition division and the Board of Appeal have substantially infringed the procedural safeguards of Articles 73 and 79 of the CTMR due to an alleged lack of reasoning and a violation of the right to be heard.

Pleas in law:

ultra vires

---
May 21, 2015

Mr. Kevin Cooper Revealing Homes, LLC 705 Powers Ferry Road, #415 Marietta, GA 30067

Dear Mr. Cooper:

This is in response to your March 10, 2015, letter sent to the docket (No. FAA-2015-0588) petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Revealing Homes, LLC (Revealing Homes) for an exemption. You requested to operate an unmanned aircraft system to conduct aerial photography for real estate.

By letter dated April 1, 2015, which posted to the docket April 10, the FAA sent you a rejection letter asking you to provide the following information:

 The specific section or sections of the Title 14 Code of Regulations (14 CFR) from which you sought relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you sought an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

In your response, posted to the docket on April 16, 2015, you failed to cite the specific regulations from which you sought relief, provide an adequate response for how your exemption would benefit the public, and justify how your exemption would not adversely affect safety.2 Because your petition does not meet the requirement of 14 CFR § 11.81, the FAA has closed your request. Should you reapply, you may submit a new petition for exemption to the public docket.

Sincerely,

/s/

Lirio Liu

Director Office of Rulemaking
# C_2008219EN.01000102.xml

| 28.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 219/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 219/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5210 — Siemens/Ortner/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/C 219/02)

On 31 July 2008, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in German and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition website (http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5210. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu). |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32008M5210. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law (http://eur-lex.europa.eu).

---
Before the First Division,

January 23, 1942

No. 46867.

#### Protest 998508-G of Moritz Tanus (New York).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

It was stipulated that the lift vans in question are similar to those the subject of Abstract 43642. They were therefore held to be the usual and ordinary containers of duty-free merchandise. The protest was sustained.
FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL EASLEY; STEPHANIA

SESSION,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

v.

CITY OF RIVERSIDE; SERGIO DIAZ;

SILVIO MACIAS; DOES, 1 to 10,

inclusive,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 16

- 55941

D.C. No.

5:14

- cv

- 00117

- TJH

- SP

Central District of California,

Riverside

ORDER

THOMAS , Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that

this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 35(a)

and Circuit Rule 35

- 3. The three

- judge panel disposition in this case shall not be

cited as prec edent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.

Judges Watford and R. Nelson did not participate in the deliberations or vote

in this case. 

# FILED

NOV 15 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 11, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 18248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6859]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Transportation Intermediary Licenses Correction

    In the OTI Applicant Notice published in the Federal Register on 
March 8, 2007 (72 FR 10532) reference to the name of the ASBCO 
Container Sevices Inc. is corrected to read:

``ASECO Container Services Inc.''

    Dated: April 6, 2007.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-6859 Filed 4-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
Exhibit No. 32.1

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

# 

In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Texas Pacific Land Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), Roy Thomas, Chief Executive Officer of the Trust,
certifies, to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to §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.

TEXAS PACIFIC LAND TRUST

      
      
     
     
     
     
     
     
  
(Registrant)

|Date:  May 10, 2004 |  | By:/s/  Roy Thomas

   
  
Roy Thomas, General Agent and 
   
   Chief Executive Officer
|------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 68 (Tuesday, April 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 17889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6690]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-388-000]


Texas Gas Transmission, LLC; Notice of Tariff Filing and Non-
Conforming Service Agreements

April 4, 2007.
    Take notice that on April 2, 2007, Texas Gas Transmission, LLC, 
(Texas Gas) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective 
April 1, 2007:

Second Revised Sheet No. 52
Original Sheet No. 52A
Ninth Revised Sheet No. 56

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). 
Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that 
document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on 
or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#64222136272b0a080d0a01371114140b161024020116074a030b12"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="afe9eafdece0c1c3c6c1cafcdadfdfc0dddbefc9caddcc81c8c0d9">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-6690 Filed 4-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
No. 41919.

#### Protest 212007-G of American Express Co. (New York).

*347Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The record showed that certain items consist of laces similar to those involved in *Amrein*v. *United States*(T. D. 49551). The claim at 75 percent under paragraph 1430 was therefore sustained.
No. 48655.

#### Protest 63761-K of Ades Bros. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It appeared from the official record that the entry was liquidated on May 13, 1940, and the protest filed January 29, 1941. The motion of counsel for the defendant to dismiss was therefore granted.
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: FAA- 2011 - 1413 Directorate Identifier: 2011NM062AD

SB560XL - 32 -41 --- 2/25/11 GOODRICH 3 - 1571 - 32 - 7 --- 2/25/11 GOODRICH CMM 32 -45 -48, R3 --- 2/25/11

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

### MA **Y 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
Case: 2:11-cv-01077-EAS-NMK Doc #: 33 Filed: 08/16/12 Page: 1 of 4  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-01077-EAS-NMK Doc #: 33 Filed: 08/16/12 Page: 2 of 4  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-01077-EAS-NMK Doc #: 33 Filed: 08/16/12 Page: 3 of 4  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-01077-EAS-NMK Doc #: 33 Filed: 08/16/12 Page: 4 of 4  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-11T12:22:48-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
# C_2007211EN.01002001.xml

| 8.9.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/20

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Regensburg (Germany) lodged on 21 June 2007 — Staatsanwaltschaft Regensburg v Klaus Bourquain

(Case C-297/07)

(2007/C 211/37)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Regensburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Staatsanwaltschaft Regensburg

Applicant:

Defendant: Klaus Bourquain

Defendant:

Question referred

With regard to the interpretation of Article 54 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders (1), does the rule prohibiting a person whose trial has been finally disposed of in one contracting party from being prosecuted in another contracting party for the same act apply, where the penalty imposed on him could never be enforced under the laws of the sentencing contracting party?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2000 L 239, p. 19.

1

---
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 Annual Report of American Independence Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Roy T. K. Thung, Chief Executive 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.





|                                                          |  |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------- |  |  | 
|/s/   Roy T. K. Thung
Chief Executive Officer
May 9, 2006 |  |  | 





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





1
Exhibit No. 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 of Texas Pacific Land Trust (the “Trust”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Roy Thomas, Chief Executive Officer of the Trust, certifies, to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.






TEXAS PACIFIC LAND TRUST(Registrant)Date:  May 5, 2010

By:
/s/ Roy ThomasRoy Thomas, General Agent and Chief Executive Officer
Case: 2:11-cv-01008-MHW-MRA Doc #: 15 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 1 of 3  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-01008-MHW-MRA Doc #: 15 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 2 of 3  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:11-cv-01008-MHW-MRA Doc #: 15 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 3 of 3  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-11T21:59:38-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
Change Order 17 to Construction Agreement, dated February 1, 2006



 EXHIBIT 10.4 
 CHANGE ORDER FORM 
 PROJECT NAME: 42-inch Sabine Pass Pipeline Project 
 COMPANY: Cheniere Sabine Pass Pipeline Company 
 CONTRACTOR:
Willbros Engineers, Inc. 
 CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: CO-017 
 DATE OF CHANGE ORDER: May 12, 2008 
 DATE OF AGREEMENT: February 1, 2006 
 The Agreement between the Parties listed above is changed as follows: (attach additional documentation if necessary) 
 This change order is for accounting purposes to move the charges associated with an electrical cable relocation at Duck Blind road from CO-010 to CO-017. At
Cheniere’s direction, Willbros made payments directly to Jeff Davis Electric Coop in the amounts shown on the attached Willbros invoices. Jeff Davis services and the amounts paid were outside Willbros’ construction scope of work covered by
CO-010. Originally, Jeff Davis invoices were handled as a provisional amount associated with engineering in CO-010. 
 Adjustment to price under the
Agreement: 

				
	 The original Guaranteed Maximum Price was
	  	$	67,670,200
	 Net change by previously authorized Change Orders #1 - 16
	  	$	2,510,650
	 The Guaranteed Maximum Price prior to the Change Order was
	  	$	70,180,850
	The Guaranteed Maximum Price will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by this Change Order in the amount of	  	$	100,827
	 The new Guaranteed Maximum Price including this Change Order will be
	  	$	70,281,677

 Adjustment to dates: 

			
	The Preparation and Material Receipt Commencement Date will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by 0 calendar days and as a result of
this Change Order is now:	  	January 1, 2007
	The Construction Commencement Date will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by 0 calendar days and as a result of this Change Order
is now:	  	April 1, 2007
	The Scheduled Mechanical Completion Date will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by 0 calendar days and as a result of this Change
Order is now:	  	March 20, 2008

  

 1 of 2 








 Other impacts to liability or obligation of Willbros or Cheniere under the Agreement: None 
 Upon execution of this Change Order by Cheniere and Willbros, the above-referenced change shall become a valid and binding part of the original Agreement without
exception or qualification, unless noted in this Change Order. Except as modified by this and any previously issued Change Orders, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This Change Order is executed
by each of the Cheniere’s Authorized Representative and Willbros’ Authorized Representative. 
  
  

			
	CHENIERE SABINE PASS PIPELINE COMPANY


			
		
	Name	 	   /s/ R. Keith Teague

	Cheniere’s Authorized Representative


			
		
	Title	 	   President



			
		
	Date of Signing	 	   5/22/08



			
	
	WILLBROS ENGINEERS, INC.


			
		
	Name	 	   /s/ Curtis E. Simkin

	Willbros’ Authorized Representative
		 	Curtis E. Simkin


			
	Title	 	     President



			
		
	Date of Signing	 	 6/9/08


  

 2 of 2
CC - Filed by Filing Services Canada Inc. 403-717-3898









	
	CERTIFICATIONS







		
	 
	I,  James R. Moynes certify that:




1.  I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F for Black Diamond Brands Corporation; 

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 officers 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 we 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 controls 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 controls over financial reporting; and

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

      a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls 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: August 8, 2008







		
	 
	/s/ James R. Moynes

James R. Moynes

Director, VP