alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021382EN.01000401.xml

| 20.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 382/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 382/4

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 2 August 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — A v B

(Case C-262/21 PPU) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility - Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 - Scope - Article 2(11) - Definition of ‘wrongful removal or retention of a child’ - Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 - Application for the return of a young child whose parents have joint custody - Third-country nationals - Transfer of the child and his or her mother to the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 (Dublin III))

(2021/C 382/04)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: A

Defendant: B

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(11) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, must be interpreted as meaning that the situation in which one parent, without the consent of the other parent, is led to take his or her child from his or her Member State of habitual residence to another Member State in application of a transfer decision, made by the former Member State on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, and then to remain in the latter Member State after that transfer decision has been annulled without the authorities of the former Member State deciding to take back the persons transferred or to grant them residence, cannot constitute a wrongful removal or retention within the meaning of that provision.

---

(1)  OJ C 252, 28.6.2021.

---
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 Chang-On International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Guomin Li, 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; and2
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated:  August 14, 2009








By:       /s/ Guomin Li


Guomin Li


Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 13.2




CERTIFICATION




The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the annual report of Israel Chemicals Ltd. on Form 20-F (the “Report”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code. Avi Doitchman, the Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer & Strategy of Israel Chemicals Ltd., certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:




1.
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and




2.
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Israel Chemicals Ltd.




Date:
March 19, 2015








/s/ Avi DoitchmanAvi Doitchman

Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer & Strategy
# C_2022418EN.01000901.xml

| 31.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 418/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 418/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas — Lithuania) — UAB ‘HA.EN.’ v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

(Case C-227/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Right to deduct input VAT - Sale of an item of immovable property between taxable persons - Vendor subject to insolvency proceedings - National practice under which the purchaser is denied the right of deduction on the ground that he or she knew or should have known of the vendor’s difficulties in paying the output tax - Fraud and abuse of rights - Conditions)

(2022/C 418/11)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos vyriausiasis administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: UAB ‘HA.EN.’

Defendant: Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

Operative part of the judgment

Article 168(a) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in conjunction with the principle of fiscal neutrality,

must be interpreted as precluding a national practice under which, in the context of the sale of an item of immovable property between taxable persons, the purchaser is denied the right to deduct input value added tax (VAT) merely because he or she knew or should have known that the vendor was in financial difficulty, or even insolvent, and that that circumstance could result in the vendor not paying or not being able to pay VAT into the public purse.

---

(1)  OJ C 242, 21.6.2021.

---
# RECEIVED SEP182015 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATIONHEARING

## DOCKET OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC ) In theMatter of:

.) ) Federal Express Corporation ) ) Respondent )

HonorableRichardC. Goodwin U.S. AdministrativeLaw Judge ) ) FAADOCKET No. FAA 2014-0864 (Civil PenaltyAction)

FDMS No. FAA 2014-0864

COMPLAINANT'S NOTICE OF CHANGE OF MAILINGADDRESS NOW COMES the Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter "FAA") pursuant to the Rules of Practice in FAA Civil Penalty Actions, 14 CFR § 13.201 et. 

### seq. Complainant hereby informs the court and all the parties listed on the service list that Complainant's mailing address, telephone and FAX are as follows:

James Archier, Senior Attorney Enforcement Division, Southwest Federal AviationAdministration 10101 Hillwood Parkway Fort Worth, Texas 76177 E-mail: james.archier@faa.gov Telephone: (817) 222-5099 (Main) (817) 222-5074 (Direct) (817) 222-5945 (Fax)

Please direct all pleadings, correspondence and court filings to the attorney of record at this new address.

1Respectfully submitted this 17th day of September 2015.

Peter J. Lynch Assistant Chief Counsel for Enforcement



# <___nv,

# =:2N~Lf

,/'/··· J"\J:rtEes Archier, Senior Attorney .// //Enforcement Division, Southwest Team /**~** Federal Aviation Administr_ation**~** 10101 Hillwood Parkway Fort Worth, Texas 76177 E-mail: james.archier@faa.gov Telephone: (817) 222-5099 (Main) (817) 222-5074 (Direct) (817) 222-5945 (Fax)



### 2CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Re: Federal Express Corporation, FAA Case No. 2014SW700042
I hereby certifythat on this day, I have sent via Federal Express an executed original andone copy of theNotice of Change ofMailingAddress, addressed as follows: Hearing Docket Attention Hearing Docket Clerk Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Avenue, SW Washington DC 20591 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 Washington, DC 20591
I further certify that on this date, I have sent via Federal Express a true copy of the Notice of Change ofMailing Address, addressed as follows to:

TEL: (202) 393-9285 FAX: (202) 628-0654 Mr. Greg G. Stofko SeniorAttorney RegulatoryAffairs Federal Express Corporation 1700 PennsylvaniaAvenue, N.W. Suite 950 Washington, DC 20006

EMAIL: greg.stofko@fedex.com

TEL: (202) 496-7356Allan H. Horowitz McKenna Long &Alridge LLP 1900 K Street, NW Washington DC 20006

EMAIL: ahorowitz@mckennalong.com

3Honorable Richard C. Goodwin U.S. Administrative Law Judge Office of Hearings, M-20 U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New JerseyAvenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 Attn: Patricia Matthews (Richard.Goodwin@dot.gov

TEL: (202) 366-5121 Staff Assistant FAX: (202) 366-7536

Peter J. Lynch Assistant Chief Counsel for Enforcement 

# //---) 

# /



# . ~----:-:::k~0 Dated: September 17, 2015 ,/''Jan:i,fs Archier, Senior Attorney // EFfforcement Division, Southwest // ,///Federal AviationAdministration**~** 10101 Hillwood Parkway Fort Worth, Texas 76177 E-mail: james.archier@faa.gov Telephone: (817) 222-5099 (Main) (817) 222-5074 (Direct) (817) 222-5945 (Fax)



### 4
September 16, 1997

Mr. Frank Visconti
Mirage Resorts, Incorporated
3400 Las Vegas Boulevard, South
Las Vegas, NV 89109

Dear Frank:

This confirms our agreement that your August 18, 1992
Employment Agreement (the "Initial Agreement") has been
extended for five (5) years, commencing September 6, 1997.
You have been appointed President, Mirage Resorts Retail
Division, at an annual salary of $400,000.  The Board of
Directors today authorized the grant of an additional
150,000 options to you, at an exercise price of 26-11/16
(the closing price on August 13, 1997),  vesting  33-1/3%
on a cumulative basis at the end of each of the third,
fourth and fifth years of your extended employment period
(the "Options").  I will be providing you shortly with a
stock option agreement governing the Options.

Except as expressly provided herein, the provisions of the
Initial Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

Please date and sign the additional enclosed copy of this
letter where indicated below to confirm your agreement to
the foregoing and return to me.   Congratulations and keep
up the great work!

Very truly yours,

Mirage Resorts, Incorporated

By:  /s/ BRUCE A. LEVIN
     Bruce A. Levin
     Vice President, General 
     Counsel and Secretary
     
     I agree to the foregoing:
     
     /s/ FRANK VISCONTI
     Frank Visconti                     September 17, 1997
                          
cc:  Stephen A. Wynn

                       
                       
                       
                       
                       
                       EXHIBIT 10.8
| 1. | I havereviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of ImageWare Systems,Inc.; and |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report. |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:April 21, 2017 | ImageWareSystems, Inc. By:/s/ S. James Miller,Jr. |   |
|---------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                | S.James Miller, Jr.                                    |   |
|                | ChiefExecutive Officer(PrincipalExecutive Officer)     |   |
H. Res. 142

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

March 31, 1993.

Resolved, That the requirement of clause 4(b) of rule XI

for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee

on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is

waived with respect to a resolution reported on the legislative

day of March 31, 1993, providing for consideration of a conference report to accompany the concurrent resolution (H.

Con. Res. 64) setting forth the congressional budget for the

United States Government for the fiscal years 1994, 1995,

1996, 1997, and 1998.

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>
SKILLSOFT PLC
SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES
EXHIBIT 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES                                            JURISDICTION

SkillSoft Corporation                                   Delaware
SkillSoft Ireland Ltd                                   Ireland
SmartForce UK Limited                                   England
SkillSoft Asia Pacific Pty Ltd                          Australia
Books24x7.com, Inc.                                     Delaware
CBT Finance Limited                                     Grand Cayman
CBT Technology Limited                                  Ireland
SkillSoft Canada Limited                                Canada
SmartForce Business Skills Ltd                          Ireland
SmartCertify Direct, Inc.                               Florida
SkillSoft Deutschland GmbH                              Germany
SkillSoft New Zealand Ltd                               New Zealand
SkillSoft France SARL                                   France
SmartForce Benelux B.V.                                 Netherlands
SkillSoft Asia Pacific PTE Ltd                          Singapore
SkillSoft International Holding Corporation             Delaware
1

Filed 12/16/14 In re F .A. CA1/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication

or or dered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

In re F.A., a Person Coming Under the

Juvenile Court Law.

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

F.A.,

Defendant and Appellant. A142264

(Contra Costa County

Super. Ct. No. J11

- 00741)

F. A. appeals from an order continuing him as a ward of the juvenile court and

ordering his out of home placement. His court

- appointed counsel has filed a brief

seeking our independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25

Cal.3d 436 to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. We conclude

there are no issues requiring further rev iew and affirm.

DISCUSSION

F.A. first came under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court in 2011, when he

entered a no contest plea to allegations that he committed an assault with a deadly

weapon. He was pl aced on probation in his mother’ s custody. His record on probation

has been poor . Following his third violation of probation in October 2012, F.A. was

committed to the county’ s ranch program for 90 days. After his release from that2

commitment, F.A. violated h is probation three more times. He remained in his mother’ s

custody.

This is F.A.’ s s eventh violation of probation. He admit ted the allegations. Based

upon our review of the record, we have no reason to question the sufficienc y of the

court’s advisements, F.A.’ s waivers of his rig hts or his admissio n to the charges. His

admission appears knowing and voluntary.

In light of F.A

. ’ s poor perform ance on probation in his mother’ s custody , the court

determined that F.A.’ s welfare required his removal from the family home for a peri od o f

detention. He was placed in juvenile hall pending a court approved placement. His

m axi mum custody time was set at 144 days.

F.A.’ s counsel has repres ented to us that she advised F.A . of her intention to file a

Wende brief in this case and of F.A.’ s right to submit supplemental argument on his own

behalf. He has not done so.

There was no error. Our full review of the record discloses no issues that require

further briefing.

DISPOSITION

The order is affirmed.

_______________________ __ Siggins, J.

We concur:

_________________________ McGuiness, P.J.

_________________________ Pollak, J.
H. Res. 230

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

July 29, 1993.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 1964) to authorize appropriations for the Maritime Administration for fiscal year 1994, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with.

General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman

and ranking minority member of the Committee on Merchant

Marine and Fisheries. After general debate the bill shall be

considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall

be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of

amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the

nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on

Merchant Marine and Fisheries now printed in the bill. Each

section of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. Points of order against
2

HRES 230 EH

the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute for

failure to comply with clause 5(a) of rule XXI are waived. It

shall be in order at any time to consider the amendments en

bloc printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, if offered by the chairman of the

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries or a designee.

The amendments en bloc shall be considered as read and

shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question

in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. Points of

order against the amendments en bloc for failure to comply

with clause 7 of rule XVI are waived. At the conclusion of

consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall

rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments

as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the

Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee

amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### George Leon WILEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-540.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 21, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Sonia C. MORSE, Appellant, v. Stanley MORSE, Appellee.

No. 72-202.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 11, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2020313EN.01003101.xml

| 21.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/31

---

Action brought on 27 July 2020 — Alteryx v EUIPO — Allocate Software (ALLOCATE)

(Case T-476/20)

(2020/C 313/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Alteryx, Inc. (Irvine, California, United States) (represented by: A. Poulter and M. Holah, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Allocate Software Ltd (London, United Kingdom)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark ALLOCATE — European Union trade mark No 6 740 658

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 25 May 2020 in Case R 1709/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | annul the Cancellation Division decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Cancellation Division decision;

| — | order the defendant to bear its own costs and to pay those of the applicant, including those relating to the procedure before the Board of Appeal; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to bear its own costs and to pay those of the applicant, including those relating to the procedure before the Board of Appeal;

| — | in the event that the other party participates in the proceedings as intervener, order it to bear his own costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

in the event that the other party participates in the proceedings as intervener, order it to bear his own costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 58(1)(a) in connection with Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 58(1)(a) in connection with Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council insofar as the Board of Appeal failed to state the reasons on which the decision is based. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 94(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council insofar as the Board of Appeal failed to state the reasons on which the decision is based.

---
EXHIBIT 99.6

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Miramar Mining Corporation (the Company) on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Elaine Bennett, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



| | April 2, 2007                              | Elaine Bennett | 
| | ------------------------------------------ | -------------- | 
| | Elaine Bennett                             |               
| | Vice President and Controller,             |               
| | Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
| |                                            |                | 



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Miramar Mining Corporation and will be retained by Miramar Mining Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.









---
| Date:  September 1, 2010 | /s/ Marc T. Giles                                  |   |
|------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                               | Marc T. GilesPresident and Chief Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                      |   |
|                               |                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |   |
| Date:  September 1, 2010 | /s/ Michael R. Elia                                     |   |
|                               | Michael R. EliaExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                                                                     |   |