alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2012319EN.01001902.xml

| 20.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 319/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 319/19

---

Action brought on 20 August 2012 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-88/12)

2012/C 319/37

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by D. Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, E. Marchal and S. Orlandi, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision to calculate accredited pension rights acquired before entry into service on the basis of the new General Implementing Provisions

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of 16 January 2012 concerning the calculation of accredited pension rights acquired by the applicant before his entry into service with the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 16 January 2012 concerning the calculation of accredited pension rights acquired by the applicant before his entry into service with the Commission;

| — | in so far as necessary, annul the decision rejecting his complaint of 15 June 2012 requesting application of the General Implementing Provisions and the actuarial rates in force at the time of his request to transfer his pension rights; |
| --- | --- |

—

in so far as necessary, annul the decision rejecting his complaint of 15 June 2012 requesting application of the General Implementing Provisions and the actuarial rates in force at the time of his request to transfer his pension rights;

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

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
# C_2013032EN.01002202.xml

| 2.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/22

---

Action brought on 30 November 2012 — Alfa-Beta Vassilopoulos v OHIM — Henkel (AB terra Leaf)

(Case T-522/12)

2013/C 32/35

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Alfa-Beta Vassilopoulos SA (Gerakas Attikis, Greece) (represented by: N. Lymperis, 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: Henkel AG & Co. KGaA (Düsseldorf, Germany)

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 Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 1 October 2012 in case R 2122/2011-4 and the appeal be upheld so that CTM application AB TERRA LEAF (& device) No 8573651 proceeds to registration for all goods applied for; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 1 October 2012 in case R 2122/2011-4 and the appeal be upheld so that CTM application AB TERRA LEAF (& device) No 8573651 proceeds to registration for all goods applied for; and

| — | Order the defendant and the opponent to pay the costs of these proceedings, including those incurred in opposition and appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant and the opponent to pay the costs of these proceedings, including those incurred in opposition and appeal proceedings.

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 ‘AB terra Leaf’ in black and white, for goods in classes 3, 5 and 16 — Community trade mark application No 8573651

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 33472909 of the word mark ‘TERRA’, for goods in classes 3 and 21

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition for all the contested goods

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 75 of Council Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---
No. 74-5853.

#### Rivera *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 Iowa Telecommunications Services, Inc., (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 (the Report), I, Alan L. Wells, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by 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), as applicable, 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.



|                       |  |                                                                                                    
|---------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 5, 2008 |  | /s/ Alan L. Wells                                                                                  
|                       |  | Alan L. Wells                                                                                      
|                       |  | President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board Iowa Telecommunications Services, Inc.



40
No. 39179.

#### Protests 839803-G/86230, etc., of R. Gerber *&*Co. et al (Chicago).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

On the authority of *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 48284) the protests were sustained.
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 Report of China Natural Gas, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David She, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.





Date:
September 30, 2010





/s/
      David SheDavid
      She
                  Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MARIA CABRERA,

Appellant,

v.

BILLY NEGRON, JR.,

Appellee.

Nos. 4D21-3360 and 4D21-3362

[December 29, 2022]

Consolidated appeals from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth 

Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Stefanie C. Moon, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 

DVCE-20-002810 (63) and DVCE-20-002809 (63).

Christopher N. Link of Christopher N. Link, P.A., Plantation, for 

appellant.

Billy Negron, Jr., Howell, New Jersey, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, LEVINE and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7667

ROBERT EDGAR MOORE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District

Judge. (CA-02-888)

Submitted: January 21, 2004 Decided: March 31, 2004

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Edgar Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Drummond Bagwell,

Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Robert Edgar Moore seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2000). The order is appealable only if a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1)(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Moore has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we

deny Moore’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss

the appeal. 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         292,918
<SECURITIES>                                   199,596
<RECEIVABLES>                                  110,237
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (5,000)
<INVENTORY>                                     11,120
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               842,878
<PP&E>                                      10,208,976
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,931,527
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,357,476
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          646,568
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       536,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,873,497
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,357,476
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,284,946
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,680,176
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             209,724
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                420,658
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (189,100)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            609,758
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   609,758
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.000

</TABLE>
# Sc[HVUNVWS

JVNOIJLVNN 

# L

LNI .40 NOIJLdOUV

;,.... . 'f " (_ ,'; " , , , . ADOPTION OF , INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS

## ISSUES

APRIL 19 9 4, ARI SECTION VOTED TO PURSUE ADOPTION OF I'SO STANDARD • WILL NEW DESCRIPTORS FOR STANDARDS BE REQUIRED? - IMPACT OF USING METRIC UNITS SHOULD SEER AND HSPF BE DROPPED? • THE LAW REQUIRES DOE TO PROVIDE A METHOD TO DETERMINE ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS . HOW CAN THIS BE ACCOMPLISHED? 

# ISSUES**.,:~_** A-PRIL 

### 1994, ARI SECTIONVOTED TO PURSUE ADOPTION OF ISO STANDARD'

· WILL NEW DESCRIPTORS FOR STANDARDS BE REQUIRED?

- IMPACT OF USINGMETRIC UNITS - _ SHOULD SEERAND HS'PF BE DRO'PPED?

· THE LAW REQUIRES DOE TO PROVIDE AMETHOD TO DETERMINE ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS. HOW CAN THIS BE ACCOMPLISHED?
```

Exhibit 32

          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 Nutra Pharma Corp. on Form 10-QSB for
the period ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Rik J. Deitsch, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial 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 results of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Rik J. Deitsch
Rik J. Deitsch
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
Date: May 26, 2005
```
<PAGE>


                                                                     Exhibit 23

The Board of Directors
SJNB Financial Corp.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
33-31392) on Form S-8 of SJNB Financial Corp. of our report dated January 14,
1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of SJNB Financial Corp. and
subsidiary as of December 31, 1998, and 1997, and the related consolidated
statements of income, shareholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1998,
which report appears in the December 31, 1998, annual report on Form 10-K of
SJNB Financial Corp.

/S/ KPMG LLP


Mountain View, California
March 15, 1999
No. 39228.

#### Protest 59435-G of Fredk. Loeser & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The record showed that certain items are in chief; value of cellulose filaments similar to the merchandise involved in Abstract 37230.. The claim at 60 percent under paragraph 31 was therefore sustained.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C SECTION 1350,
                                  AS ENACTED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with Third Wave Technologies, Inc. (the "Company) Form 10-Q for
the period ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Kevin T. Conroy, Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, and Maneesh K. Arora, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, 18
U.S.C Section 1350, that on the date of this certification:

     (1) The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (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 this Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.


                                        /s/ Kevin T. Conroy
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Kevin T. Conroy
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        August 7, 2007


                                        /s/ Maneesh K. Arora
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Maneesh K. Arora
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        August 7, 2007
Exhibit32.2

Certification of CFO Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Alamosa Holdings, Inc. (the"Company") for the quarterly period endedSeptember 30, 2005, as filed with the U.S. Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"),I, Kendall W. Cowan, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of myknowledge:

|           |                                                                                                                     |
|-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1)  | The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and |

|           |                                                                                                                                                   |
|-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2)  | Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany. |

    

/s/    Kendall W.Cowan                            

Name:    KendallW. Cowan Title:      Chief Financial OfficerDate:      November 9, 2005

Thiscertification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent requiredby the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.

----
#### United States *v.*Reedy Forwarding Company for the Account of Commodity Sales Co. et al.

No. 8077.

Entry Nos. M-1312; M-1191.

Entered at Miami, Fla.

*523(Decided January 28, 1952)

*Charles J. Wagner,*Acting Assistant Attorney General *(Alfred A. Taylor, Jr.,*and *Arthur R. Martoccia,*special attorneys), for the plaintiff.

*John F. Kavanagh*for the defendants.

Johnson, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, were submitted for decision upon an oral stipulation of counsel for both sides at the calendar call, as follows:

> Mb. Mabtoccia: In both these cases it appears that the merchandise involved •was hard candy imported from, Cuba, the date of exportation of which was December 7, 1946 in 163081-A, and December 4, 1946 in 163082-A.

> It is agreed between counsel, that is counsel for the defendant importers and Government counsel, subject to the approval of this court, that the market value or the price at the time of exportation to the United States of the merchandise covered by these appeals to reappraisement, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantity, and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, was 15 cents per pound. It will be noted that the merchandise was originally entered at 14)4 cents a pound, appraised at 14)4 cents a pound, and these appeals were taken to reappraisement by the collector. It is now stipulated that the unit values, as I have previously indicated, were 15 cents a pound at or about the date of exportation, and that there was no higher foreign value as such value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930.

> Me. Kavanagh: I so stipulate, Your Honor.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value is 15 cents per pound.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Exhibit 32.2


                           INTRAOP MEDICAL CORPORATION

                            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 Intraop Medical Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Howard
Solovei, Chief Financial 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 results of operations
          of the Company.


                                        /s/ Howard Solovei
                                        ------------------
                                        Howard Solovei
                                        Chief Financial Officer

                                        Date:  August 17, 2007

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Intraop Medical Corporation and will be retained by Intraop Medical
Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
# C_2013026EN.01005601.xml

| 26.1.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/56

---

Action brought on 14 November 2012 — Sanofi v OHIM — GP Pharm (GEPRAL)

(Case T-493/12)

2013/C 26/113

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Sanofi (Paris, France) (represented by: C. Hertz-Eichenrode, 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: GP Pharm, SA (Sant Quinti de Mediona, Spain)

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 Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 September 2012 in case R 201/2012-2; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 5 September 2012 in case R 201/2012-2; and

| — | Order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘GEPRAL’, for goods in class 5 — International Registration No 1010832 designating the European Union

Community trade mark concerned:

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

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: International registration No 418607, with effect in Austria of the word mark ‘DELPRAL’, for goods in class 5

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

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

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Upheld the appeal and allowed the International registration to proceed in its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

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

Pleas in law:

---