alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016156EN.01005501.xml

| 2.5.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 156/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.5.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/55

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 17 March 2016 — Pasqualetti v Commission

(Case F-2/15) (1)

1

((Civil service - Member of the temporary staff recruited by the EEAS - Installation allowance - Daily subsistence allowance - Place of origin - Place of recruitment - Change in the place of residence - Action for annulment - Action for damages - Unlimited jurisdiction))

(2016/C 156/76)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Gergő Pasqualetti (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: A. Véghely, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by J. Currall and T. S. Bohr, acting as Agents, and subsequently by T. S. Bohr, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision refusing to grant the applicant the installation allowance and the daily subsistence allowance and application seeking an order that the Commission pay him those allowances together with interest.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Annuls the Commission’s decision of 4 March 2014, by which it refused to grant Mr Pasqualetti entitlement to the installation allowance and the daily subsistence allowance, provided for in Article 5(1) and Article 10(1) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the Commission’s decision of 4 March 2014, by which it refused to grant Mr Pasqualetti entitlement to the installation allowance and the daily subsistence allowance, provided for in Article 5(1) and Article 10(1) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay Mr Pasqualetti, in accordance with the rules in the Staff Regulations as currently in force, the allowances referred to in paragraph 1 of the operative part, together with default interest, from the dates on which they became payable respectively until the date of actual payment, at the rate fixed by the European Central Bank for its main refinancing operations and applicable during the period concerned, increased by two points; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay Mr Pasqualetti, in accordance with the rules in the Staff Regulations as currently in force, the allowances referred to in paragraph 1 of the operative part, together with default interest, from the dates on which they became payable respectively until the date of actual payment, at the rate fixed by the European Central Bank for its main refinancing operations and applicable during the period concerned, increased by two points;

| 3. | Declares that the European Commission shall bear its own costs and orders it to pay those incurred by Mr Pasqualetti. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Declares that the European Commission shall bear its own costs and orders it to pay those incurred by Mr Pasqualetti.

---

(1)  OJ C 96, 23/3/2015, p. 25.

1

---
# C_2017256EN.01001901.xml

| 7.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 256/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 256/19

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 June 2017 — Deutsche Post v EUIPO — Media Logistik (PostModern)

(Case T-13/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark PostModern - Earlier national word mark POST and earlier EU word mark Deutsche Post - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Evidence submitted for the first time before the General Court))

(2017/C 256/18)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Deutsche Post AG (Bonn, Germany) (represented by: initially K. Hamacher and C. Giersdorf, K. Hamacher, and finally K. Hamacher and G. Müllejans, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Hanne, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Media Logistik GmbH (Dresden, Germany) (represented by: S. Risthaus, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 November 2014 (Case R 2063/2013-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Deutsche Post and Media Logistik.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Deutsche Post AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Deutsche Post AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 107, 30.3.2015.

1

---
# C_2015118EN.01001901.xml

| 13.4.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/19

---

Appeal brought on 6 February 2015 by Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías, S.A. against the order of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) delivered on 25 November 2014 in Joined Cases T-426/10 and T-575/10 and in Case T-440/12 Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías v Commission

(Case C-53/15 P)

(2015/C 118/25)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías, S.A. (represented by: F. González Díaz and A. Tresandi Blanco, lawyers)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside, pursuant to Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the order of the General Court of 25 November 2014 in Joined Cases T-426/10 and T-575/10 and in Case T-440/12 Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías v Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside, pursuant to Article 263 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the order of the General Court of 25 November 2014 in Joined Cases T-426/10 and T-575/10 and in Case T-440/12 Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías v Commission;

Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías

Commission

| — | order the European Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings and the proceedings before the General Court. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings and the proceedings before the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of its appeal, the appellant puts forward a single ground of appeal.

The appellant claims that the General Court erred in law in assessing the legal interest of Moreda-Riviere Trefilerías, S.A. in bringing proceedings, as regards both the action for annulment in Case T-575/10 against the decision of the Commission of 30 September 2010 amending Decision C(2010) 4387 (final) relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.344 — Prestressing Steel), and the amendment of the pleas in law and forms of order sought in Case T-426/10 in relation to the decision of the Commission of 30 September 2010 amending Decision C(2010) 4387 (final) relating to a proceeding under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 53(1) of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/38.344 — Prestressing Steel).

---
Before the Second Division,

December 2, 1949

No. 53762.

protests 344-K, 4583-K, and 22532-K (New York).

#### Stobbs & Vickery, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
# C_2016059EN.01001001.xml

| 15.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 59/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 59/10

---

Action brought on 14 December 2015 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-665/15)

(2016/C 059/10)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: P. Guerra e Andrade and J. Hottiaux, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that, by failing to be connect to the European Union driving licence network, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(5)(d) of Directive 2006/126/EC (1). |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by failing to be connect to the European Union driving licence network, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(5)(d) of Directive 2006/126/EC (1).

1

| — | order Portuguese Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

It is apparent from Directive 2006/126 and from case-law that a Member State which issues a driving licence is required to verify whether the minimum requirements for the issue of driving licences are fulfilled.

If the Portuguese Republic is not connected to the European Union driving licence network (RESPER), it cannot verify whether the minimum requirements for the issue of driving licences are fulfilled. It cannot, in particular, verify whether the applicant already holds a driving licence in another Member State.

Moreover, as the Portuguese Republic is not connected to RESPER, other Member States cannot verify, together with Portugal, whether the minimum requirements for the issue of driving licences are fulfilled.

It should be added that other Member States cannot carry out any form of control, together with Portugal, in cases in which the minimum requirements for the issue of driving licences are clearly not fulfilled.

Accordingly, as Portugal is not connected to RESPER, it undermines the essential purpose of the requirement to be connected to the network and of Directive 2006/126, namely to improve road safety and facilitate the free movement of persons.

Article 7(5)(d) of Directive 2006/126 clearly establishes that Member States must use the EU driving licence network, in particular in order to carry out checks and especially in order to prevent a licence holder having more than one driving licence.

Under Article 16(2) of the directive, Member States were required to apply Article 7(5) of the directive as from 19 January 2013.

---

(1)  Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences (recast) (OJ 2006 L 403, p. 18).

1

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TYHEED K. BROWN,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 69 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 30th day of July, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
### MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 12

- 00272

- CV
IN RE Steven L. AMIS, Relator Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Rebecca S immons , Justice
Delivered and Filed: May 23, 2012
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION On May 2, 2012, Relator Steven L. Amis filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining that the District Clerk of Bexar County has failed to properly file documents requested by the relator. We conclude this court does not have jurisdiction to grant the requested
relief. By statute, this court may only exercise our habeas j urisdiction when confinement results from the violation of an order, judgment, or decree previously made in a civil case. See T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22. 022 (e) (West Supp. 2011). Because the petition for writ of mandamus is
directed toward the Bexar Court District Clerk and not a district or county court judge , and does not challenge an order entered in a specific underlying proceeding, the writ is not necessary to

1 This original proceeding stems from Bexar County, but does not challenge an order entered in a specific underlying proceeding pending in an identifiable court

.04

- 12

- 00272

- CV

- 2

- enforce this court’s jurisdiction

. In re Coronado , 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, r elator’s petition for writ of mandamus is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF
JURISDICTION.

PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
No. 53202.

#### Majestic Metal Novelty Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 139448-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 82 (Monday, April 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21284-21285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8136]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs


Indian Gaming

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of amendment to Approved Tribal-State Compact.

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

SUMMARY: This notice publishes the Approval of the Tribal-State Compact 
for Class III Gaming between the Spokane Tribe and the State of 
Washington.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 30, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George T. Skibine, Director, Office of 
Indian Gaming, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary--Policy and 
Economic Development, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 219-4066.

[[Page 21285]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 11 of the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA), Public Law 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2710, the 
Secretary of the Interior shall publish in the Federal Register notice 
of the approved Tribal-State compacts for the purpose of engaging in 
Class III gaming activities on Indian lands. This Compact effective 
today authorizes Class III gaming, sets limits for the size and scope 
of gaming for the Spokane Tribe and clarifies the state's regulatory 
role.

    Dated: April 19, 2007.
Carl J. Artman,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
 [FR Doc. E7-8136 Filed 4-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-4N-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

AMENDMENT OF RULE 10 5 OF

THE PENNSYLVANIA RULES

FOR CONTINUING LEGAL

EDUCATION :

:

:

:

:

:

: NO. 767

SUPREME COURT RULES

DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 9 th day of May, 2018 , upon the recommendation of the

Pennsylvania Continuing Legal Education Board ; the proposal having been published

for public comment in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, 47 Pa.B. 3487 (June 24, 2017) :

It is Ordered pursuant to Article V , Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania

that Rule 105 of the Pennsylvania Rules for Continuing Legal Education is amended in

the attached form.

This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), a nd

shall be effective in 30 days.

Additions to the rule are shown in bold and are underlined.

Deletions from the rule are shown in bold and brackets.
TIME 1425 HRS 

DATE 2/26/2015 

RECORD OF CONVERSATION

NAME(S) OF PERSON(S) CONTACTED OR IN CONFERENCE AND LOCATION 

Ray Johnson, FAA Airmen Certification Branch, AFS-810 

Jason Robinson, Aero-Flite, Lead CL-415 Pilot 

SUBJECT 

Request for further information, Aero-Flite Petition for Exemption, dated 20 February 2015 

DIGEST 

On 26 February 2015, I contacted Mr. Robinson for the aircraft model and SN so that it can be 

included on their request for exemption. 

On 27 February 2015, Mr. Robinson responded with the requested information. 

CONCLUSION, ACTION TAKEN, OR REQUIRED 

The information provided by Aero-Flite, Inc. will be used by the Federal Aviation 

Administration during the consideration of the petition for exemption. 

Ray Johnson, AFS-810
(Reap. Dec. 9379)

#### Finwood Industries, Inc., et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 769118, etc.

(Decided April 7, 1959)

*Siegel, Ma/ndell <& Davidson*for the plaintiffs.

*George Ooehran DouTj,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached schedule of reappraisements, which relate to plywood exported from Finland in the years 1955 and 1956, have been submitted for decision upon stipulation of counsel limited to the items where the merchandise was advanced in value and appraised on the basis of the home market value.

On the agreed facts, as to such merchandise, I find that foreign value, as defined in section 402(c), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, is the proper basis for the determination of the value thereof, and that such value, in each instance was the appraised unit value, less 4 per centum, packed.

The said appeals for reappraisement, having been abandoned with respect to those items of merchandise where appraisement was made on the basis of the entered invoice unit values, are to that extent dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
# C_2017014EN.01000701.xml

| 16.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 14/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 10 November 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Ciclat Soc. coop v Consip SpA, Autorità per la Vigilanza sui Contratti Pubblici di lavori, servizi e forniture

(Case C-199/15) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2004/18/EC - Article 45 - Articles 49 and 56 TFEU - Public procurement - Conditions for exclusion from a procedure for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts - Obligations relating to the payment of social security contributions - Social security contributions payment certificate - Correction of irregularities))

(2017/C 014/08)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ciclat Soc. coop

Defendants: Consip SpA, Autorità per la Vigilanza sui Contratti Pubblici di lavori, servizi e forniture

Intervening parties: Istituto nazionale per l’assicurazione contro gli infortuni sul lavoro (INAIL), Team Service SCARL, as the representative of ATI-Snam Lazio Sud Srl and Ati-Linda Srl, Consorzio Servizi Integrati

Operative part of the judgment

Article 45 of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which obliges a contracting authority to consider an infringement relating to the payment of social security contributions, recorded in a certificate requested by a contracting authority on its own initiative and issued by the social security institutions, to be a ground for exclusion, where that infringement existed on the date of the participation in a tender procedure, even if it no longer existed at the time of the award or of the verification carried out on the contracting authority’s own initiative.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 262, 10.8.2015.

---
# C_2016243EN.01003101.xml

| 4.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 243/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 243/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 25 May 2016 — Ice Mountain Ibiza v EUIPO — Marbella Atlantic Ocean Club (ocean ibiza)

(Case T-6/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ocean ibiza - Earlier national figurative marks OC ocean club and OC ocean club Ibiza - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 243/32)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Ice Mountain Ibiza, SL (San Antonio, Spain) (represented by: J. L. Gracia Albero, F. Miazzetto and E. Cebollero González, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Marbella Atlantic Ocean Club, SL (Puerto Banús, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 October 2014 (Case R 2207/2013-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Marbella Atlantic Ocean Club and Ice Mountain Ibiza

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Ice Mountain Ibiza, SL to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ice Mountain Ibiza, SL to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 73, 2.3.2015.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION OF 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Texas Industries, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2009 (the Report), I, Kenneth R. Allen, Vice
President-Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, hereby certify 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, as amended; and

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



|                       |  |  |  |                                                                
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: January 7, 2010 |  |  |  | /s/ Kenneth R. Allen                                           
|                       |  |  |  | Kenneth R. Allen                                               
|                       |  |  |  | Vice President  Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
# C_2015429EN.01000802.xml

| 21.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 429/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 429/8

---

Appeal brought on 26 January 2015 by Cantina Broglie 1 Srl against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 27 November 2014 in Case T-154/11 Cantina Broglie 1 v OHIM

Cantina Broglie 1

OHIM

(Case C-34/15 P)

(2015/C 429/11)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Cantina Broglie 1 Srl (represented by: A. Rizzoli, avvocato)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Camera di Commercio, Industria, Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona

Other parties to the proceedings:

By order of 15 October 2015 the Court (Ninth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered Cantina Broglie 1 Srl to bear its own costs.

---
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**UnionCarbide Corporation and Subsidiaries**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

** **

I, Eudio Gil, VicePresident, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of Union Carbide Corporation(the “Corporation”), certify that:

 

1.              the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofthe Corporation for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and

 

2.              the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Corporation.

 

 
| /s/ EUDIO GIL                  |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
| Eudio Gil                      |   |
| Vice President,  Treasurer and |   |
| Chief Financial Officer        |   |
| Date: July 29, 2008       |   |

 

30

----