alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1612 Referred in House (RFH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1612

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 16, 2011

  Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the 
   Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To provide the Department of Justice with additional tools to target 
              extraterritorial drug trafficking activity.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Targeting Transnational Drug 
Trafficking Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. POSSESSION, MANUFACTURE OR DISTRIBUTION FOR PURPOSES OF 
              UNLAWFUL IMPORTATIONS.

    Section 1009 of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 
U.S.C. 959) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
        (c) and (d), respectively; and
            (2) in subsection (a), by striking ``It shall'' and all 
        that follows and inserting the following: ``It shall be 
        unlawful for any person to manufacture or distribute a 
        controlled substance in schedule I or II or flunitrazepam or a 
        listed chemical intending, knowing, or having reasonable cause 
        to believe that such substance or chemical will be unlawfully 
        imported into the United States or into waters within a 
        distance of 12 miles of the coast of the United States.
    ``(b) It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture or 
distribute a listed chemical--
            ``(1) intending or knowing that the listed chemical will be 
        used to manufacture a controlled substance; and
            ``(2) intending, knowing, or having reasonable cause to 
        believe that the controlled substance will be unlawfully 
        imported into the United States.''.

            Passed the Senate December 15, 2011.

            Attest:

                                                NANCY ERICKSON,

                                                             Secretary.
```
# C_2012243EN.01000801.xml

| 11.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 243/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 243/8

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (France) lodged on 29 May 2012 — Association Vent De Colère! Fédération nationale, Alain Bruguier, Jean-Pierre Le Gorgeu, Marie-Christine Piot, Eric Errec, Didier Wirth, Daniel Steinbach, Sabine Servan-Schreiber, Philippe Rusch, Pierre Recher, Jean-Louis Moret, Didier Jocteur Monrozier v Ministre de l’écologie, du développement durable, des transports et du logement, Ministre de l’Économie, des Finances et de l’Industrie

(Case C-262/12)

2012/C 243/14

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Association Vent De Colère! Fédération nationale, Alain Bruguier, Jean-Pierre Le Gorgeu, Marie-Christine Piot, Eric Errec, Didier Wirth, Daniel Steinbach, Sabine Servan-Schreiber, Philippe Rusch, Pierre Recher, Jean-Louis Moret, Didier Jocteur Monrozier

Applicants:

Defendants: Ministre de l’écologie, du développement durable, des transports et du logement, Ministre de l’Économie, des Finances et de l’Industrie

Defendants:

Question referred

Question referred

In the light of the change in the mechanism for financing in full the additional costs imposed on Électricité de France and the non-nationalised distributors referred to in Article 23 of Law No 46-628 of 8 April 1946 on the nationalisation of electricity and gas by the obligation to purchase at higher than market price the electricity generated by wind-power installations, as a result of Law No 2003-8 of 3 January 2003, must that mechanism now be regarded as an intervention by the State or through State resources within the meaning, and for the application, of Article 87 EC?

---
# C_2015107EN.01000601.xml

| 30.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 107/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 107/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Art & Allposters International BV v Stichting Pictoright

(Case C-419/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Intellectual property - Copyright and related rights - Directive 2001/29/EC - Article 4 - Distribution right - Exhaustion rule - Concept of ‘object’ - Transfer of the image of a protected work from a paper poster to a painter’s canvas - Replacement of the medium - Impact on exhaustion))

(2015/C 107/07)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Art & Allposters International BV

Defendant: Stichting Pictoright

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the rule of exhaustion of the distribution right set out in Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/29 does not apply in a situation where a reproduction of a protected work, after having been marketed in the European Union with the copyright holder’s consent, has undergone an alteration of its medium, such as the transfer of that reproduction from a paper poster onto a canvas, and is placed on the market again in its new form.

---

(1)  OJ C 325, 9.11.2013.

---
null

440.46826
<Page>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.2

                                LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

                        StarMedia Argentina Sociedad de
                         Responsabilidad Limitada (SRL)
                            Buenos Aires, Argentina

                           StarMedia do Brasil Ltda.
                               Sao Paulo, Brazil

                        StarMedia Mobile do Brasil Ltda.
                               Sao Paulo, Brazil

                        Servicios Interactivos Limitada,
                                Santiago, Chile

                            StarMedia Chile Limitada
                                Santiago, Chile

                     StarMedia Colombia Ltda., Sociedad de
                            Responsabilidad Limitada
                                Bogota, Colombia

                           SMN de Mexico, Sociedad de
                     Responsabilidad Limitada (S. de R.L.)
                              Mexico City, Mexico

                        Servicios Star Mexico, Sociedad
                de Responsabilidad Limitada de Capital Variable
                              Mexico City, Mexico

                               AdNet S.A. de C.V.
                              Mexico City, Mexico

                            StarMedia Network, S.L.
                                 Madrid, Spain

              StarMedia Network Americas, Sociedad Anonima (S.A.)
                              Montevideo, Uruguay

                     StarMedia Sociedad de Responsabilidad
                                Limitada S.R.L.
                              Montevideo, Uruguay

                                StarMedia S.R.L.
                               Caracas, Venezuela

                          StarMedia Mobile (USA), Inc.
                                    Delaware

                          StarMedia Mobile (BVI), Inc.
                             British Virgin Islands
# C_2015213EN.01002901.xml

| 29.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/29

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 May 2015 — Dalli v Commission

(Case T-562/12) (1)

1

((Member of the Commission - OLAF investigation - Alleged oral decision of the President of the Commission to require the resignation of the person concerned - Action for annulment - No actionable measure - Inadmissibility - Action for damages))

(2015/C 213/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: John Dalli (St Julians, Malta) (represented by: L. Levi, A.-M. Alamanou and S. Rodrigues, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Smulders, J. Baquero Cruz and J. P. Keppenne, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the oral decision allegedly taken by the President of the Commission on 16 October 2012 to terminate the applicant’s office as a Member of the Commission and for compensation for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr John Dalli to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr John Dalli to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 46, 16.2.2013.

1

---
No. 54315.

#### Collin & Gissel *v.*United States,

protest 122971-K (Galveston).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the merchandise consists of torsion balances, vertical field balances, and parts thereof, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Asiatic Petroleum Corp.*v. *United States*(19 Cust. Ct. 3, C. D. 1058) and *American Askania Corporation*v. *United States*(21 id. 26, C. D. 1121). The claim at 27J4 percent under paragraph 372 was therefore sustained.
No. 46460.

#### Protests 770138-G, etc., of Amer. Machine & Foundry Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
# C_2013055EN.01002301.xml

| 23.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/23

---

Action brought on 28 December 2012 — Pyrox v OHIM — Köb Holzheizsysteme (PYROX)

(Case T-575/12)

2013/C 55/41

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Pyrox GmbH (Oberhausen, Germany) (represented by: T. Eigen, 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: Köb Holzheizsysteme GmbH (Wolfurt/Vorarlberg, Austria)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 4 October 2012 in joined Cases R 2187/2011-1 and R 2507/2011-1; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 4 October 2012 in joined Cases R 2187/2011-1 and R 2507/2011-1;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs including those incurred in the proceedings before OHIM. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs including those incurred in the proceedings before OHIM.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: the applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: the figurative mark which includes the word element ‘PYROX’, for goods in Classes 4, 7 and 11 — Community trade mark application No 8 612 781

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Köb Holzheizsysteme GmbH

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: the national word mark ‘PYROT’ for goods in Class 11

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: the opposition was upheld in part

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: the contested decision was annulled in part and the application was rejected in its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009

Pleas in law:

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
EXTRACTED FROM THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED
IN THE BODY OF THE ACCOMPANYING FORM 20-F AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
<CURRENCY> UK STERLING
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                              81
<SECURITIES>                                     1,275
<RECEIVABLES>                                      176
<ALLOWANCES>                                        27
<INVENTORY>                                         13
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,790
<PP&E>                                           2,144
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,328
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,836
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,076
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            42
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,701
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,836
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,882
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,290
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    52
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    27
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    626
<INCOME-TAX>                                       236
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                390
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       390
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     24.0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 1 , 2014

p0325 

# Order

Clerk April 1 , 2014

147130 & (27)

POSEN CONSTRUCTION, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v SC: 147130

COA: 311214

Wayne CC: 09

- 003465

- CK

CITY OF DEARBORN,

Defendant/Third

- Party Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v

NEYER, TISEO & HINDO, LTD.,

d/b/a NTH CONSULTANTS, LTD.,

Third

- Party Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion to supp lement the record is GRANTED. The

application for leave to appeal the April 9, 2013 order of the Court of Appeals is

considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we

REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consider ation as on leave granted.
# C_2016136EN.01002801.xml

| 18.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 136/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 136/28

---

Judgment of the General Court of 29 February 2016 — Panalpina World Transport (Holding) and Others v Commission

(Case T-270/12) (1)

1

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - International air freight forwarding services - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Price fixing - Surcharges and charging mechanisms affecting the final price - Fines - Proportionality - Gravity of the infringement - Equal treatment - Obligation to state reasons - Settlement - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines))

(2016/C 136/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Panalpina World Transport (Holding) Ltd (Basle, Switzerland), Panalpina Management AG (Basle), Panalpina China Ltd (Hong Kong, China) (represented by: S. Mobley, A. Stratakis, T. Grimmer and B. Smith, Solicitors)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka, G. Meessen and P. Van Nuffel, acting as Agents, and by C. Thomas, Solicitor)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2012) 1959 final of 28 March 2012 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 [TFEU] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39462 — Freight forwarding), in so far as it concerns the applicants, and for variation of the fines imposed on them in that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Panalpina World Transport (Holding) Ltd, Panalpina Management AG and Panalpina China Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Panalpina World Transport (Holding) Ltd, Panalpina Management AG and Panalpina China Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 243, 11.8.2012.

1

---
# C_2014448EN.01001901.xml

| 15.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 448/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 448/19

---

Judgment of the General Court of 5 November 2014 — Mayaleh v Council

(Joined Cases T-307/12 and T-408/13) (1)

1

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Syria - Freezing of funds - Functions of the governor of the Central Bank of Syria - Actions for annulment - Communication of an act imposing restrictive measures - Time-limit for bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Rights of the defence - Fair hearing - Obligation to state reasons - Buren of proof - Right to effective judicial protection - Proportionality - Right to property - Right to privacy and family life - Application of restrictions on admission to a national of a Member State - Freedom of movement for European Union nationals))

(2014/C 448/24)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Adib Mayaleh (Damascus, Syri) (represented by: G. Karouni and C. Dumont, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and V. Piessevaux, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Partial annulment of: (i) Council Implementing Decision 2012/256/CFSP of 14 May 2012 implementing Decision 2011/782/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2012 L 126, p. 9); (ii) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 410/2012 of 14 May 2012 implementing Article 32(1) of Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2012 L 126, p. 3); (iii) Council Decision 2012/739/CFSP of 29 November 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Syria and repealing Decision 2011/782/CFSP (OJ 2012 L 330, p. 21); (iv) Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 363/2013 of 22 April 2013 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2013 L 111, p. 1; corrigendum OJ 2013 L 127, p. 27); and (v) Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP of 31 May 2013 concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2013 L 147, p. 14).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the application in Case T-307/12; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the application in Case T-307/12;

| 2. | Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the application in Case T-408/13. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the application in Case T-408/13.

| 3. | Orders Mr Adib Mayaleh to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Mr Adib Mayaleh to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 273, 8.9.2012.

1

---
# C_2014024EN.01002003.xml

| 25.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 December 2013 — Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria v OHIM (VALORES DE FUTURO)

(Case T-428/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for community word mark VALORES DE FUTURO - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2014/C 24/36

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA (Bilbao, Spain) (represented by: J. de Oliveira Vaz Miranda Sousa and N. González-Alberto Rodríguez, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 July 2012 (Case R 2299/2011-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign VALORES DE FUTURO as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 366, 24.11.2012.

1

---