alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017030EN.01001201.xml

| 30.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 30/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 30/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 24 August 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hessisches Landesarbeitsgericht — Germany) — Jürgen Webb-Sämann v Christopher Seagon (acting as liquidator in the insolvency of Baumarkt Praktiker DIY GmbH)

(Case C-454/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social policy - Directive 2008/94/EC - Article 8 - Protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer - Provisions related to social security - Scope - Measures necessary to protect immediate or prospective entitlements of employees under supplementary pension schemes - Obligation to provide for a right to have outstanding pension contributions excluded from the scope of insolvency proceedings - Absence))

(2017/C 030/11)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Hessisches Landesarbeitsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Jürgen Webb-Sämann

Applicant:

Defendant: Christopher Seagon (acting as liquidator in the insolvency of Baumarkt Praktiker DIY GmbH)

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 8 of Directive 2008/94/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 on the protection of employees in the event of the insolvency of their employer must be interpreted as meaning that it does not require that, in the event of employer insolvency, money withheld from a former employee’s salary converted into pension contributions, which that employer should have paid into a pension fund on behalf of that employee, be excluded from the scope of insolvency proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 389, 23.11.2015.

1

---
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-40548

Summary Calendar

 

WENDELL K. WASHINGTON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

R. MILLER, Correctional Officer III; J. ALFORD,

Warden; P. ADAMS, Property Officer, 

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 9:97-CV-403

- - - - - - - - - -

December 13, 2000

Before DAVIS, JONES, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Wendell K. Washington, a Texas prisoner (# 649796), appeals

from the district court’s sua sponte dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 civil rights complaint as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(e)(2), following a hearing pursuant to Spears v. McCotter,

766 F.2d 179 (5th Cir. 1985). Washington alleged that the

defendants improperly confiscated personal property from his cell

in both September 1997 and January 1998. In an amended

complaint, he also maintained that they filed a false
No. 00-40548

-2-

disciplinary charge against him in retaliation for, inter alia,

his having filed the original complaint and that he was convicted

of such charge in violation of his due process rights. 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in

concluding that Washington’s claims were frivolous. See Berry v.

Brady, 192 F.3d 504, 507 (5th Cir. 1999). Washington failed to

state a cognizable constitutional claim regarding the deprivation

of his property because Texas provides an adequate

postdeprivation remedy. See Murphy v. Collins, 26 F.3d 541, 543

(5th Cir. 1994). Because of the confusing and inconsistent

nature of the cumulative allegations he has made in support of

his retaliation claim, Washington failed to establish a

“chronology of events” from which a retaliatory motive could be

inferred. See Woods v. Smith, 60 F.3d 1161, 1164-66 (5th Cir.

1995). Finally, insofar as Washington has asserted that his due

process rights were violated at his disciplinary hearing, the

punishments imposed for the purported disciplinary violation did

not implicate a constitutionally cognizable liberty interest. 

See Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 483-84 (1995); Luken v.

Scott, 71 F.3d 192, 193 (5th Cir. 1995). 

AFFIRMED.
# Official Journal L 340/16 N

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 340 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4716 November 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 340

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4716 November 2004

---

| Contents | | II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Council |
| | * | 2004/754/EC:Council decision of 11 October 2004 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Tajikistan, of the other part | 1 |
| Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Tajikistan, of the other part | 2 |
| | * | 2004/755/Euratom:Council decision of 11 October 2004 approving the conclusion by the Commission, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Tajikistan, of the other part | 21 |

Contents

II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory

page

Council

*

2004/754/EC:Council decision of 11 October 2004 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Tajikistan, of the other part

1

Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Tajikistan, of the other part

2

*

2004/755/Euratom:Council decision of 11 October 2004 approving the conclusion by the Commission, on behalf of the European Atomic Energy Community, of the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of Tajikistan, of the other part

21

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
----

Information procedure — Technical rules

(2005/C 111/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services. (OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37; OJ L 217, 5.8.1998, p. 18).

Notifications of draft national technical rules received by the Commission

The Commission draws attention to the judgement delivered on 30 April 1996 in the ‘CIA Security’ case (C-194/94 — ECR I, p. 2201), in which the Court of Justice ruled that Articles 8 and 9 of Directive 98/34/EC (formerly 83/189/EEC) are to be interpreted as meaning that individuals may rely on them before national courts which must decline to apply a national technical regulation which has not been notified in accordance with the Directive.

This judgement confirms the Commission's communication of 1 October 1986 (OJ C 245, 1.10.1986, p. 4).

Accordingly, breach of the obligation to notify renders the technical regulations concerned inapplicable, and consequently unenforceable against individuals.

For more information on the notification procedure, please write to:

Also consult the website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/tris/

If you require any further information on these notifications, please contact the national departments listed below:

LIST OF NATIONAL DEPARTMENTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF DIRECTIVE 98/34/EC

BELGIUM

CZECH REPUBLIC

DENMARK

GERMANY

ESTONIA

GREECE

SPAIN

FRANCE

IRELAND

ITALY

CYPRUS

LATVIA

LITHUANIA

LUXEMBOURG

HUNGARY

MALTA

NETHERLANDS

AUSTRIA

POLAND

PORTUGAL

SLOVENIA

SLOVAKIA

FINLAND

SWEDEN

UNITED KINGDOM

EFTA - ESA

TURKEY

----

(1)  Year - registration number - Member State of origin.

(2)  Period during which the draft may not be adopted.

(3)  No standstill period since the Commission accepts the grounds of urgent adoption invoked by the notifying Member State.

(4)  No standstill period since the measure concerns technical specifications or other requirements or rules on services linked to fiscal or financial measures, pursuant to the third indent of the second paragraph of Article 1(11) of Directive 98/34/EC.

(5)  Information procedure closed.

----
No. 54217.

#### W. F. Mackay *v.*United States,

protests 139961-K, etc. (Pembina).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Case: 2:12-cv-01132-EAS-TPK Doc #: 13 Filed: 03/26/14 Page: 1 of 5  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:12-cv-01132-EAS-TPK Doc #: 13 Filed: 03/26/14 Page: 2 of 5  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:12-cv-01132-EAS-TPK Doc #: 13 Filed: 03/26/14 Page: 3 of 5  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:12-cv-01132-EAS-TPK Doc #: 13 Filed: 03/26/14 Page: 4 of 5  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:12-cv-01132-EAS-TPK Doc #: 13 Filed: 03/26/14 Page: 5 of 5  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-12T09:57:46-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
No. 64339.

protests 59/8702, etc. (Buffalo).

#### C. J. Tower & Sons of Buffalo, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of prepared or preserved pork similar in all material respects to that the subject of *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(43 Cust Ct. 36, C.D. 2100), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
----

Order of the Court of First Instance of 15 March 2006 — Bioelettrica v Commission

(Case T -56/03) (1)

(2006/C 121/33)

Language of the case: Italian

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

----

(1)OJ C 101, 26.4.2003.

----
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 of TSR, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J.F. Hughes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 result of operations of the Company.











The foregoing certification is incorporated solely for the purposes of complying with the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and is not intended to be used for any other purpose.








/s/ J.F. Hughes


Chairman of the Board,


Chief Executive Officer


and Director





October 8, 2010
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

 

Reference is hereby made tothat certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of January 1, 2016, byand among CCRE COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES, L.P., as Depositor, WELLS FARGOBANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, CWCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC,as Special Servicer, WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, andWELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, PayingAgent, and Custodian, and PARK BRIDGE LENDER SERVICES LLC, as Operating Advisorand Asset Representations Reviewer with respect to Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates, CFCRE 2016-C3 (the "Agreement").Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meaningsassigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 10.11 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1.            A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period fromJanuary 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of itsperformance per the Agreement during such period has been made under mysupervision, and 

 

2.            To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer hasfulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughoutthe Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of Februray 2017.

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President                       

Wells Fargo Bank 

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll go far |
|------------------------|------------------------------------|
Exhibit
4.1


 


DESCRIPTION
OF THE REGISTRANT’S SECURITIES


REGISTERED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE


SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


 


Newpoint
Financial Corp. (the “Company”) has one class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, which is the Company’s common stock, $0.001 par value per share.


 


Description
of Common Stock


 


The
authorized capital stock of the Company consists of 100,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share, and 50,000,000 shares
of preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share.


 


Holders
of the Company’s common stock are entitled to one vote for each share on all matters submitted to a stockholder vote. Holders of
common stock do not have cumulative voting rights. Therefore (subject to the rights of the holders of any outstanding preferred stock),
holders of a majority of the shares of common stock voting for the election of directors can elect all of the directors to our Board
of Directors. Holders of the Company’s common stock representing a majority of the voting power of the Company’s capital
stock issued, outstanding and entitled to vote, represented in person or by proxy, are necessary to constitute a quorum at any meeting
of stockholders. A vote by the holders of a majority of the Company’s outstanding shares is required to effectuate certain fundamental
corporate changes such as a merger or an amendment to the Company’s certificate of incorporation.


 


Holders
of the Company’s common stock are entitled to share in all dividends that the Board of Directors, in its discretion, declares from
legally available funds. In the event of a liquidation, dissolution or winding up, each outstanding share entitles its holder to participate
pro rata in all assets that remain after payment of liabilities and after providing for each class of stock, if any, having preference
over the common stock. The Company’s common stock has no pre-emptive rights, no conversion rights, and there are no redemption
provisions applicable to the Company’s common stock.
EXHIBIT 4.6


 


DESCRIPTION OF COMMON
STOCK


 


Our only class of security registered pursuant
to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act is our common stock, $0.001 par value per share. 100,000,000 shares of common stock are
authorized.


 


The holders of the Common
Stock have equal ratable rights to dividends from funds legally available if and when declared by the Registrant’s board of directors
(the “Board”) and are entitled to share ratably in all of the Registrant’s assets available for distribution to holders
of Common Stock upon liquidation, dissolution or winding up of our affairs. The Common Stock does not provide the right to preemptive,
subscription or conversion rights. Shares of the Common Stock are non-assessable and are not subject to any redemption or sinking fund
provisions or rights. The Common Stockholders are entitled to one non-cumulative vote per share on all matters on which stockholders
may vote.
Exhibit 10.10


 


ADDENDUM TO THE LOAN AGREEMENT


 


		To:	Eternal BV, The Lender





 


		From:	ClimateRock, The Borrower



 


		Date:	31 March 2022



 


This addendum to the Loan Agreement dated October 1, 2021 (hereinafter
referred to as the “addendum”), is made as of March 31, 2022, by and between:


 


		(1)	ClimateRock (the “Borrower”), 50 Sloane Avenue, London, SW3 3DD, The United Kingdom and



 


		(2)	Eternal BV (the “Lender”), Mariëndaal 8, 6861 WN Oosterbeek, The Netherlands.



 


(the Lender and Borrower individually or collectively referred to as
a “Party” and the Parties”, respectively).


 


In consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein and other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Borrower and the Lender agree to alter
‘Drawdown Period’ defined in SCHEDULE 1 of the said Loan Agreement which should be read as follows:


 


Drawdown Period: 1 October 2021 – 30
April 2022


 


The rest of the provisions of the said Loan Agreement remain effective.


 





	/s/ Per Regnarsson	 	/s/ Charles Ratelband
	Signed by Per Regnarsson	 	Signed by Charles Ratelband for and on behalf of
    the Lender
	Re for and on behalf of the Borrower ClimateRock	 	
    

    Eternal BV



 


 





		Long Form Loan Agreement - Unsecured
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                         890,300
<SECURITIES>                                 2,553,500
<RECEIVABLES>                                  420,600
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    743,200
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,835,600
<PP&E>                                       1,575,600
<DEPRECIATION>                                  57,900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              22,756,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,575,800
<BONDS>                                     10,746,300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          228,300
<PREFERRED>                                  1,053,000
<COMMON>                                     5,041,300
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,021,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                22,756,400
<SALES>                                      1,350,400
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,350,400
<CGS>                                          875,400
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  875,400
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               953,100
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             808,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                703,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                    26,100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            668,600
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   668,600
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.2

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 Union Tank Car Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mark J. Garrette, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In witness whereof, I have executed this certification as of the 14thday of May, 2007.



/s/ Mark J. GarretteMark J. GarrettePrincipal Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7423

DAVID M. GARCIA,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-97-1374-3-17BC)

Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 24, 1999

Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David M. Garcia, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief

Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and 79(a), the orders from

which Garcia appeals were entered on the district court’s docket

August 7 and September 8, 1998. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d

1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

David M. Garcia seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & Supp. 1998) and his motion to reconsider. We have reviewed

the record and the district court’s opinion, accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation, and the order denying reconsideration

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Garcia’s motion

for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. See Garcia v. South Carolina, No.

CA-97-1374-3-17BC (D.S.C. Aug. 7 & Sept. 8, 1998).* We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED