alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 96 (Friday, May 18, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 28076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9612]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration


Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Registration

    By Notice dated December 14, 2006, and published in the Federal 
Register on December 22, 2006, (71 FR 77066), Organichem Corporation, 
33 Riverside Avenue, Rensselaer, New York 12144, made application by 
renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered 
as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances 
listed in schedule I and II:

 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Drug                               Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marihuana (7360)...........................  I
Tetrahydrocannabinols (7370)...............  I
Amphetamine (1100).........................  II
Methylphenidate (1724).....................  II
Pentobarbital (2270).......................  II
Hydrocodone (9193).........................  II
Meperidine(9230)...........................  II
Dextropropoxyphene (9273)..................  II
Fentanyl (9801)............................  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to manufacture bulk controlled substances for use 
in product development and for distribution to its customers.
    In reference to drug code 7360 (Marihuana), the company plans to 
bulk manufacture cannabidiol as a synthetic intermediate. This 
controlled substance will be further synthesized to bulk manufacture a 
synthetic THC (7370). No other activity for this drug code is 
authorized for this registration.
    No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered 
the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of 
Organichem Corporation to manufacture the listed basic classes of 
controlled substances is consistent with the public interest at this 
time. DEA has investigated Organichem Corporation to ensure that the 
company's registration is consistent with the public interest. The 
investigation has included inspection and testing of the company's 
physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance 
with State and local laws, and a review of the company's background and 
history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823, and in accordance with 
21 CFR 1301.33, the above named company is granted registration as a 
bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed.

    Dated: May 14, 2007.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
 [FR Doc. E7-9612 Filed 5-17-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-60803

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

HERMAN MCGEE, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:15-CR-9-1

Before BARKSDALE, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Herman McGee, Jr., pleaded guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to one 

count of conspiring to possess, with intent to distribute, more than 500 grams 

of cocaine and a detectable amount of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 

§ 846, and one count of conspiring to use/carry a firearm during, and in relation 

to, a drug-trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(o). His sole claim

on appeal, which falls within the exception to his appeal and postconviction-

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 30, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-60803 Document: 00514576703 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/30/2018
No. 17-60803

2

review waiver, is that his attorney rendered ineffective assistance by failing to 

object to a three-level enhancement he received under Guideline § 3B1.1(b) for 

being a manager or supervisor of criminal activity that involved five or more 

participants, or was otherwise extensive. 

District courts are “best suited to developing the facts necessary to 

determining the adequacy of representation”. Massaro v. United States, 538 

U.S. 500, 505 (2003). Accordingly, our court generally will not consider the 

merits of an ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) claim on direct appeal. 

United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014). The exception is for 

those “rare cases in which the record allows a reviewing court to fairly evaluate 

the merits of the claim”. Id. (internal quotation omitted). The “preferred 

method” for bringing such a claim is pursuant to a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. 

United States v. Bishop, 629 F.3d 462, 469 (5th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation 

omitted).

The record is not sufficiently developed to allow a fair evaluation of

McGee’s IAC claim. We therefore decline to consider it, without prejudice to 

collateral review pursuant to a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. E.g., Isgar, 739 

F.3d at 841. 

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 17-60803 Document: 00514576703 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/30/2018
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-19-0000459 15-OCT-2019 09:35 AM
5(&200(1'(' )25 )8//7(;7 38%/,&$7,213XUVXDQW WR 6L[WK &LUFXLW 5XOH (/(&7521,& &,7$7,21  )(' $SS 3 WK &LU)LOH 1DPH DS	

			



$11<6$5.(761&21$/' 2%,1(5
$11<6$5.(761&$11<622'6/<0287+1& $11<6!,921,$1&$11<6(55,0$11&$11<6"(67/$1'$5.(761& $11<622'61& $11<6#2<1&$%&''()*+,--.&/0
	1&.&01&.102344%&55('**+671&,&81#29%&''()*+7KH +RQRUDEOH :DOWHU +HUEHUW 5LFH &KLHI 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 'LVWULFW-XGJH IRU WKH 6RXWKHUQ 'LVWULFW RI 2KLR VLWWLQJ E\ GHVLJQDWLRQ8/#+9''1	-/899''3.&,
%0.#2%!	%1#2
0.1#2
,&		10.:#%;/	,< "
% 3&&/.  102 .& ,--"302
%
	,	 ,% #
	
 

7   
%
,	
		"02&%=%
	,	 ,%#
	

	&102.&,--3>  ,
% # 0. #2  0 ---  /-& ?& &. &4 1&1&2 & &.  55@ 1&2& // & 08A-141&".00.0-1/88&0/&&.-4/01  1&B / & 1&  
 & &2 ;241&1;00;&&011&0B1&0//C..1&01&-&.D8/D11/01.0-&2E&-081&./0 8&  0 1  B 1&-&& 01&1B41&./4(2&14&101@%&''()*+0%01&0-21021
!9')55+55FG509'''H0B010?B&14&0&2"#
$$!9*'))9)+(@G09''H&&B;&00//C2B0&4&410--&;&B.&0-&2/&2B01&0BI.&/4&.0&/08408A-141&019)53)*9)*J(*5G3A10555H-0-B0&0BI1&/:/E0-&B1020;/20280.&4&1&&.4108B&1&&-%$9*'))@@#2/,%&''()*+):H KDYH KHOG WKDW FORVLQJ HQGV D GHEWRU
V REOLJDWLRQ WR SD\ WKHWUXVWHH IHH6HH 9HUJRV Y *UHJJ
V (QWHUV ,QF )G   WK&LU 4C A   ,- 9* 55J 10 //8 &.4CAB&4..&0-8A-14455F08A-141&1&./K&-&.&2E&?24CA&-4.01/&.11&84#)'9''*0-& &; 4C A & .4 0 1/ B1&.02B1&0B&&AB2&.0&--&44CA-.  8  - 1/ 84 # )' 55F  -/8)'01;/B41&8408A-141&4)5550
	.&01& &8 /&B & 1&B 0 8A-14 & 0-J-&12814CA0&-0/4.8;0&.1&./&001;1&4CA1A&;20&; &/ . .& 0 -& 8 1& 0 :1/& & 0 / 2& &; 8.&   &8C104CAC8/0&48.&0.1&.:-20/08A-141&2;04CA08/;&40&:-;010;- &  &2E& -   &8C/&&  &8 0 -- 0 . 11& & 01 1& ;010 & 84 J 9''' B 08A-141&0--.&&;1;01004--&8A-14-.&/2&./&&2/BB1.&8A-141&.1&1.&0--&&..20
	C-&2/"9F
	LJ'*G&.H9F
	L+F5G8HG+HG.2&. -&2/H  0 .  2&B 84 9F 
	L5)'GHG@H;010-&BB-*%&''()*+&&0.2.-&01A?4.08-&0
	.&-&0410110-&..&10?G124.1&0&.H011&B&/;010B&11.0 . 0 8 M9+' .& 10 ?  ;0108/ &  0 M+''' M+'' .& 10?;0108/&M+'''&/&80MJ+'''0.08-48&04&.01/&0.&&;201?.&;0100.&;0?&&C&/-&&0.1&&1 24 8 & 0 /& &. 8//01&--2&M''''.D8/D&?&&BM+''''''01:&.0-- 0 /2 &. D8/D  20 &. 0 11&2&&&.1&./&G&2D1&B&/DHB0/0.&82&02?&&.;;010;B;&B& " &'' ( () 	 *% (
 
+,*-&''(()	*%(
!'')9*9@G@055@HD
 1&. &4 1&1&0 2-&022 /-&4 84 &2D . /0-1@9)J5F'G@055+H"0D0C22-C0&.1&&.01&&.&111&2&/CD2%"
3(*F5
	9)+9*G5F5HG?&2
2%"9*9
	*J'*F+G5JHH"00&;B&4//82&D&4&:/02B 0&4  & &   -& 02B ..1 & &2C D "2% " 
4%*F)5@55J+JG@055+H&/;0 /A84 &2 0 . & .D8/D4;0008A-141&&2B0&40&202/0;&1&//&4&&01&:&--4&-4/%&''()*++/;00 .2 .&/0?&&.08&C""	
5.)F ) +9+ +)* G50  55*H  3&0 &8 4CA1A&;20-&&1&./&08A-C0/A20-4/0&1&2E&-1&./08A-14  2/--0-02&02.11&.0B-1.14&;00/20D8/D .&--&&.0."200-&(1&./&/2&.D8/D/82&00B&02B0&40;&0B.&/&&.08K1 "8&1-01&1&0-2055@//&21&/-08/; 1&/-  -4/ & 0 - 1488&0:1&.08A-14-&120 0&20& 0 -&12 0 -4/C 101 ; & 102  
 &0 ;& 0 101&1&.0-4/8&8&--41&?  ,11&24  &. 0 -4/1208&C4(&(4-&(1&./&&-2:- / 8 11& .&  0 11& &. 0C?4.04D8/D0  0   ? /82& 0 8/;0B/B0./& 0 4 ; . /& 1&/-2 &2C:-& 0  0 55@ // 1&./&;&&/-10/&..1&/2&021) (3 %2 '*()JF'*0&2	G55+HG/-0HNO01&.2&1:&&.-&(1&./&?4.-4//0--&-&8&00&	8:-10-4


%
664-%)
No. 74-5746.

#### Morgan *v.*Swenson, Warden.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,860
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,702
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,141)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,130
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,364
<PP&E>                                          43,209
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,853)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 475,881
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          123,909
<BONDS>                                        280,999
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     150,985
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   475,881
<SALES>                                        161,355
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               161,355
<CGS>                                          119,873
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  119,873
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   912
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,217
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,806
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,054
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    485
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,539
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 32.1

                     CERTIFICATION OF DISCLOSURE 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 Amended  Quarterly Report of Infinity Capital Group, Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form  10-QSB/A for the period  ending  September 30, 2006 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Amended Report") I, Gregory H. Laborde, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 USC section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

Dated: January 25, 2007


/s/Gregory H. Laborde
------------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory H. Laborde, Chief Executive Officer and President


This certification accompanies the Amended Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Second
      Amendment

    To
      The

    Management
      Services Agreement

    


    This
      Amendment (the “Amendment”), entered into this 31st
      day of
      August 2007, is to the Management Services Agreement (the “Agreement”) entered
      into on February 6, 2006, with an effective date of February 1, 2006, by and
      between White Mountain Titanium Corporation and Mr. Michael P.
      Kurtanjek.

    


    IT
      IS
      HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

    


    1. The
      increase to compensation by 20% to reflect the devaluation of the US dollar.
      Such adjustment increased monthly compensation to US$11,400.00.

     

    2. Except
      as
      amended hereby, the Agreement shall continue to be, and shall remain, in full
      force and effect. Except as provided herein, this Amendment shall not be deemed
      (i) to be a waiver of, or consent to, or a modification or amendment of, any
      other term or condition of the Agreement or (ii) to prejudice any right or
      rights which the parties may now have or may have in the future under or in
      connection with the Agreement or any of the instruments or agreements referred
      to therein, as the same may be amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise
      modified from time to time.

    


    3. The
      terms
      of the Agreement are incorporated herein by reference and shall form a part
      of
      this Amendment as if set forth herein in their entirety.

    


    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF,
      each of
      the parties hereto has executed this Agreement the respective day and year
      set
      forth below.

    


    
      	 	White Mountain Titanium Corporation
	 	 	 
	
              Date:
                August 31, 2007

            	
              By
                

            	
              /s/
                Terese Gieselman

            
	 	 	
              Terese Gieselman, Corporate Secretary

            
	 	 	 
	 	Michael
              P. Kurtanjek
	 	 	 
	
              Date:
                August 31, 2007

            	
              By
                

            	
              /s/
                Michael P. Kurtanjek

            
	 	 	
              Michael P. Kurtanjek
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Performers chronicle African American history through music

By Jason KaneshiroDLA Troop Support Public Affairs

                PHILADELPHIA  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

## Related Stories

Resiliency key message during African American History Month observance

EEOAfrican American History MonthTroop Support
# C_2013377EN.01002302.xml

| 21.12.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 377/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 377/23

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (1st Chamber) of 7 November 2013 — CA v Commission

(Case F-60/12) (1)

1

(Civil service - Officials - Application instituting proceedings - Formal requirements - Statement of the grounds on which the application is based - Action manifestly inadmissible)

2013/C 377/53

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: CA (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: E. Guerrieri Ciaceri, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Berardis-Kayser)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

The application to annul the defendant’s decision not to award the applicant 6 promotion points in respect of the 2011 promotion year and an application for the award of the points necessary for her promotion to grade AST 2 with retroactive effect.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | CA is to bear her own costs and is ordered to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

CA is to bear her own costs and is ordered to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 243, 11.8.2012, p. 34.

1

---
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   Exhibit 23.1
 
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement
on Form S-8 (No. 333-72271) of United Road Services, Inc. of our report dated
March 5, 1999, except as to Note 16(b), which is as of March 16, 1999,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of United Road Services, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1998, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for
the period from July 25, 1997 (inception) through December 31, 1997 and for
the year ended December 31, 1998, and the related schedule, which report
appears in the December 31, 1998 annual report on Form 10-K of United Road
Services, Inc.
 
                                          /s/ KPMG LLP
 
Albany, New York
March 29, 1999
#### Dr. Lanny S. ODIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LASER VISION CENTERS, INC. and Medical Care International, Inc., Defendants-Respondents.

No. 73595.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

Sept. 1, 1998.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Oct. 26, 1998.

Application for Transfer Denied Nov. 24, 1998.

The Stolar Partnership, H. Kent Munson, St. Louis, for appellant.

Dankenbring, Greiman, Osterholt & Hoffman, P.C., Gerald P. Greiman, Craig A. Wilson, St. Louis, for Laser Vision.

Armstrong, Teasdale, Schlafly & Davis, Jay A. Summerville, Matthew H. Armstrong, St. Louis, for Medical Care.

Before ROBERT G. DOWD, Jr., P.J., and SIMON and HOFF, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Dr. Lanny S. Odin appeals the trial court’s judgment entered in favor of Medical Care International, Inc. and Laser Vision Centers, Inc. upon consideration of the parties’ motions for summary judgment in this damages action. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no prece-dential or jurisprudential value. Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).

*445The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
No. 96-5830.

#### Dawn *v.*United States.

C. A. 7th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
p. 1



# OAR Box 1778 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 50 ) ll-B-2 5 Docket Number: 

# A-90-0 6

Printed 10/28/20089:50:53 AM Sheet 50of 276P. 2

II-B-2 5 

# :2E J UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y

Offic e o fAi rQualityPlannin g an d Standard s Researc h Triangl e Park, Nort h Carolin a 2771 1

" < DtlQ-iV MA V \.i 153? 

# U, 

# E B ' O I

JU.M I 2 199 1 j[ ! J . MEMORANDU

M 

### '\ A! R DOCXV. T SUBJECT: Wiscons> n Etectr^ e Powe rCompan y(WEPCO ) Preventio n o f ifX c T^K^ 6r1orat1o n (PSD") Applicabilit yDecisio n

Directo r Management Division , OAQP S (MD-15 ) Davi d Kee , Directo r A1 ran d Radiatio n Division , Regio n V Thi s 1s-a n Interi m respons e t o you rMarc h 25 , 198 8 memorandu m concernin g WEPCO' s Por t Washingto n Powe rPlan t "renovation. " Sinc e receivin g you rrequest , m ystaf fhas met wit h WEPC O (an d thei rattorneys ) an d ha s had a numbe ro f teleconference s wit h you rstaff , th e Offic e o fGenera l Counse l (OGC) , an d th e Stationar ySourc e Complianc e Division . Th e issu e o fwhethe rthi s proposa l constitute s routin e repair , maintenance , an d replacemen t require s additiona l informatio n befor e thi s questio n ca n b e resolved . Th e statu s o fthi s effor t 1 s tha t you rstaf fwil l ask , throug h th e State , fo radditiona l Informatio n o n costs , wha t 1 s "normal " repai ran d replacemen t wor k 1 n th e powe rIndustry , an d whic h o fth e liste d project s actuall yexten d th e usefu l lif e o fth e facility . W e ar e doin g th e sam

e throug h th e Emission s Standard s Divisio n her e I n th e Offic e o fA1 r Qualit yPlannin g an d Standards . Th e OG C 1 s makin g th e sam

e reques t t o WEPCO'

s attorney . W

e wil l al l confe r agai n o n Ma

y 1 7 and , 1 fal l th e Informatio n I s availabl e a t tha t time , w e wil l b e i n a bette rpositio n t o com e t o a conclusion . W e ar e currentl ytargetin g a fina l respons e b y th e en d o fMay . cc : R . Campbel l S . Farrel l D . Gree n E . LIlU s G . McCutche n D . Solomo n
# C_2012217EN.01001301.xml

| 21.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio (Italy) lodged on 24 May 2012 — Sky Italia Srl v Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni, Commissione di Garanzia dell’Attuazione della Legge sullo Sciopero nei Servizi Pubblici Essenziali

(Case C-257/12)

2012/C 217/28

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per il Lazio

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Sky Italia Srl

Applicant:

Defendants: Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni, Commissione di Garanzia dell’Attuazione della Legge sullo Sciopero nei Servizi Pubblici Essenziali

Defendants:

Question referred

Question referred

Are the Community provisions in the sector, and in particular the provisions of Directive No 2002/20 EC, (1) to be interpreted as precluding the national rules referred to, in particular Law No 266 of 2005, as those provisions are actually applied by regulation included?

1

---

(1)  Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive) (OJ 2002 L 108, p. 21).

1

---