alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022463EN.01001201.xml

| 5.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 463/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 463/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 13 October 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Bremen — Germany) — X GmbH & Co. KG v Finanzamt Bremen

(Case C-431/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services - Corporation tax - Determination of the taxable income of companies - Transactions featuring foreign elements - Obligation to provide fiscal documentation of business relations between parties with a relationship of interdependence - Estimate of the taxable income and surcharge by way of a penalty)

(2022/C 463/14)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Bremen

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: X GmbH & Co. KG

Defendant: Finanzamt Bremen

Operative part of the judgment

Article 49 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude national legislation under which, in the first place, the taxpayer is subject to an obligation to provide documentation on the nature and content of, as well as on the economic and legal bases for, prices and other terms and conditions of his, her or its cross-border business transactions, with parties with which he, she or it has a relationship of interdependence, in capital or other aspects, enabling that taxpayer or those parties to exercise a definite influence over the other, and which provides, in the second place, in the event of infringement of that obligation, not only that his, her or its taxable income in the Member State concerned is rebuttably presumed to be higher than that which has been declared, and the tax authorities may carry out an estimate to the detriment of the taxpayer, but also that a surcharge of an amount equivalent to at least 5 % and at most 10 % of the excess income determined is imposed, with a minimum amount of EUR 5 000, unless non-compliance with that obligation is excusable or if the fault involved is minor.

---

(1)  OJ C 401, 4.10.2021.

---
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-14-00728- CR

Brandon Mm angarero R angam ar, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F B ELL COUNTY , 426 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 731 29, H ONO RAB LE F ANCY H. JEZEK, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Br andon Mmang are ro Rang amar filed a notice of appeal fr om a judgme nt of conviction for violation of protec tive order by committing assault. See Tex. Penal Code § 2 5 .07. Howeve r, the trial court cer tified that Rang amar waived the rig ht of appea l. See T ex . R
. Ap p . P. 25.2(a)( 2), (d) . Rang amar and his counsel sig ned the c ertification. The a ppeal is dismissed. See Tex. R. App. P . 25.2(d).

J eff Rose, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Rose and Goodw in Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: De cembe r 10, 2014 Do Not Publish
259 La. 703

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Joseph Drubie WILLIAMS v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 51682.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 21, 1971.

In re: Joseph Drubie Williams applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and habeas corpus.

Application denied. The record does not warrant the exercise of our jurisdiction.
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:** 2011

- NM

- 084

- AD

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
#### EATON, YALE AND TOWNE, INC., a foreign corporation, Petitioner, v. Charles Samuel MOYER, an incompetent, by and through William Trickel, Jr., as Guardian of the Estate of the person of Charles Samuel Moyer, an incompetent, Respondents.

No. 70-304.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 24, 1970.

Certiorari dismissed.
<page>



				     EXHIBIT 32.02



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 Annual Report of Dean Witter Diversified
Futures Fund Limited Partnership (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-K
for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Kevin
Perry, Chief Financial Officer, Demeter Management Corporation, the
general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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 Partnership.








By:	  /s/	Kevin Perry

Name:		Kevin Perry
Title:	Chief Financial Officer

Date:		March 31, 2006
#### P. R. INSULATION LTD., INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PERFORMANCE CONTRACTORS, LTD., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 4103.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

Dec. 13, 1972.

Lewis & Lewis, by Seth Lewis, Jr., Ope-lousas, for defendant-appellant.

DeVillier & Ardoin, by J. Michael Morrow, Eunice, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before FRUGÉ, HOOD, and MILLER, JJ-

FRUGÉ, Judge.

P. R. Insulation Ltd., Inc., plaintiff-appellant, appeals from the District Court’s ruling denying plaintiff the right to reintroduce evidence that was allegedly omitted from the trial record at the confirmation of default proceeding.

The facts and issues of this case arc almost identical to P. R. Insulation, Ltd. v. *323Performance Contractors, Ltd., La.App., 271 So.2d 320. We are rendering judgment in that companion suit on this date. For the reasons assigned in that opinion, the order of the District Judge appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Preferred Ortho Products, Inc., as Assignee of Mercedes, Luis, Appellant, <br><br>against<br><br>Titan Insurance Co., Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant.Gialleonardo, McDonald &amp; Turchetti (Kevon Lewis of counsel), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Joseph Esposito, J.), entered July 9, 2015. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with $25 costs.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiff had failed to appear for duly scheduled examinations under oath.</p><p>Plaintiff's argument as to defendant's practices and procedures regarding the mailing of the denial of claim form lacks merit (<a href="../2008/2008_04072.htm" target="_blank"><i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co.</i>, 50 AD3d 1123</a> [2008]). Plaintiff's remaining argument is not properly before this court, as it is being raised for the first time on appeal (<a href="../2011/2011_07610.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Joe v Upper Room Ministries, Inc.</i>, 88 AD3d 963</a> [2011]; <a href="../2004/2004_09598.htm" target="_blank"><i>Gulf Ins. Co. v Kanen</i>, 13 AD3d 579</a> [2004]; <a href="../2015/2015_51219.htm" target="_blank"><i>Mind &amp; Body Acupuncture, P.C. v Elrac, Inc.</i>, 48 Misc 3d 139</a>[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 51219[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2015]), and we decline to consider it.</p><p>Accordingly, the order is affirmed.</p><p>PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.</p>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: May 18, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
IV

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 442

Electing Representative Lucas to the Committees on Government Operations

and Agriculture.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 25, 1994

Mr. MICHEL submitted the following resolution; which was considered and

agreed to

RESOLUTION

Electing Representative Lucas to the Committees on

Government Operations and Agriculture.

1 Resolved, That Representative Frank D. Lucas of

2 Oklahoma be and is hereby elected to the following stand3 ing committees of the House of Representatives: the Com4 mittee on Agriculture and the Committee on Government

5 Operations.

Æ
IV

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 503

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that Congress, in

providing funds for any fiscal year for programs to assist the homeless,

should ensure that these funds are fairly apportioned for homeless veterans to help return homeless veterans to self-sufficient and productive

lives.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 1, 1994

Mr. STUMP (for himself, Mr. SPENCE, Mr. SANGMEISTER, Mr. SMITH of New

Jersey, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Ms. BROWN of Florida, Mr. QUINN, Mr. BACHUS

of Alabama, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. MACHTLEY, Mr. SANTORUM, and Mr.

FALEOMAVAEGA) submitted the following resolution; which was referred

jointly to the Committees on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs and

Veterans’ Affairs

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that

Congress, in providing funds for any fiscal year for programs to assist the homeless, should ensure that these

funds are fairly apportioned for homeless veterans to

help return homeless veterans to self-sufficient and productive lives.

Whereas homelessness affects an estimated 250,000 veterans

and possibly twice that number over the course of a year;

Whereas nationwide one-third of America’s adult homeless

are veterans;
2

•HRES 503 IH

Whereas these individuals who once proudly wore the uniform

of this country face difficult and sometimes seemingly

overwhelming obstacles in getting back on their feet; and

Whereas Congress has established an array of Federal programs to help return the homeless to self-sufficient and

productive lives: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that—

3 (1) a more proportionate share of the funds ap4 propriated for any fiscal year for programs to assist

5 the homeless should be appropriated to the Sec6 retary of Veterans Affairs for programs to assist

7 homeless veterans that are administered by that Sec8 retary; and

9 (2) funds appropriated for any fiscal year for

10 programs to assist the homeless should be adminis11 tered by all agencies in a proportional manner to

12 reach out to homeless veterans and help return these

13 men and women to self-sufficient and productive

14 lives.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000751256
<NAME> DYCO OIL AND GAS PROGRAM 1985-2 LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1994
<CASH>                                         154,512
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   41,489
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               196,001
<PP&E>                                      22,443,388
<DEPRECIATION>                              22,361,328
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 306,398
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,025
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     287,259
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   306,398
<SALES>                                        249,234
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               250,411
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  207,873
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 42,538
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             42,538
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    42,538
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    10.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### STATE of Florida, Petitioner, v. Willie REMBERT, Respondent.

No. 44723.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 15, 1974.

Certiorari denied. 284 So.2d 428.

ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
#### Lori C. Brenckman, Appellant, v Eli Lilly & Co. et al., Respondents.

[654 NYS2d 139]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered October 5, 1995, which, *inter alia,*granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, an out-of-State resident, concedes that inasmuch as the diethylstilbestrol (DES) to which she was exposed was purchased in Connecticut and her exposure to it occurred there and she is unable to identify specifically the manufacturers or suppliers of the DES that allegedly caused her injuries, Connecticut law applies. Connecticut does not recognize non-identification theories of liability in products liability cases such as this. She argues, however, that in granting summary judgment *(see, Godfrey v Eli Lilly & Co.,*223 AD2d 427, *lv denied*88 NY2d 801), the motion court improperly put the burden on her to come forward with proof of identification, and that in any event she should have first been given an opportunity to conduct disclosure. We disagree. Any available extant information on identification can only be with plaintiffs mother, her mother’s physician or the pharmacy where the records were transferred after the pharmacy where the DES was bought was closed, and, in the absence of affidavits from such persons, we see no reason for delaying dismissal of the action. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Tom and Andrias, JJ.
Exhibit 32-1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the
Quarterly Report of The Goldfield Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John H. Sottile,
Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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



/S/ JOHN H. SOTTILEJohn H. SottileChairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)May 14, 2009




25
EE-RM-TP-97-440 COMMENT 08EE Example - 1 Full SEER Higher Rating 

15.0 14.5 

a: 14.0 

W W en 13.5 

'0 

13.0 

U) .--

.g 12.5 

c.. 

E 12.0 

::l 

E ·x 11.5 

as 

11.0 10.5 

10.0 

-

-

-

-

• OEM Matched 

. leM Mixed 

- OEM Mixed 

• 2 

I. "H- I .. .. n 

•• ••• w 

• 10.2 • 10.2 

10 10 11 

Source: ARt Diroctory 

-

n .n 

.w • .w 

-i 12.1 • I" 12.2 1--1n .n .- ,- •• 

• · 11.2 

, 

, 

11 12 12 12 

OEM Unit SEER 
EE-RM-TP-97-440 COMMENT 08EE Example - Same Rating - Smaller Face A

6.0 

_ Matched Face Area 

_ Mixed Face Area 

Matched Capacity 

Capacity 

5.0 

= 

39.5 

c- 

III 

1'0 

Q) 

.... 

< 

Q) 4.0 

(,) 

1'0 

LL 

0 

(.) 

ci. 

1'0 3.1 

> W 

3.0 

Mixed Coil Only 

2 Rows! 

t 

2.2 2.2 

2.0 

18 24 30 36 42 48 

Unit Size 
EE-RM-TP-97-440 COMMENT 08EE

8.0 

7.0 

:= 

g 6.0 

as QI 

... 

oCt 

QI 

u 5.0 

as 

LL. 

'0 

(.) 

g. 4.0 

> 

w 

3.0 

2.0 

Example - Higher SEER - Same Face Are

11 

)( 

10 

11 

)( 

11 

)( 

Rating Advantage 

10.1 

10 

_ Matched Face Area 

_ Mixed Face Area 

SEER 

3.1 3.1 

2.2 2.2 

18 24 30 

11 11 11 

)( )( )( 

10.5 10.5 

4.0 4.0 

36 42 48 

Unit Size
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 434 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 434

   Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that any law 
  enacted pertaining to the reform of our Nation's health care system 
should apply to Members of Congress and all Federal employees enrolled 
in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), including any 
individual who is appointed or elected to a position in the executive, 
    legislative, or judicial branch of the United States Government.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 23, 1994

  Mr. Portman submitted the following resolution; which was referred 
 jointly to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, and 
                     Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that any law 
  enacted pertaining to the reform of our Nation's health care system 
should apply to Members of Congress and all Federal employees enrolled 
in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), including any 
individual who is appointed or elected to a position in the executive, 
    legislative, or judicial branch of the United States Government.

Whereas Members of Congress and all Federal employees, so long as each is 
        enrolled in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), 
        should not be treated any differently than any other United States 
        citizen with respect to health care: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
any law enacted pertaining to the reform of our Nation's health care 
system should apply to Members of Congress and all Federal employees 
enrolled in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), 
including any individual who is appointed or elected to a position in 
the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the United States 
Government.

                                 <all>
```
#### Bobby BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-454.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 4, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 29, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Record ofDiscussion 

### Docket No . FAA- 

## (),O 

# D 

# -65

**1~** 

# 2o

**cs-~/JM-** 

## 017-A-J) Directorate Identifier: -AD With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)?



### ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE TOPICS DISCUSSED Boeing Paul LeBar 11/15/2012 Mod compliance time and cost A4A Joe White 11 /20/2012 Modification



### Other/Additional Information:



### 10
##### 



Exhibit 23.2 Apollo Gold
Corporation 
 Amendment
No. 1
 
 Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the
Year Ended December 31, 2004
____________________
 CONSENT OF MINE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES
____________________ 
 We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of any reserves and other analyses
performed by us in our capacity as an independent consultant to Apollo Gold Corporation (the
Company), which are set forth in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2004, in the Companys Registration Statements on Form S-8 No. 333-113889, S-3 No.
333-119198, S-3 No. 333-121004, S-3 No. 333-122433, and S-3 No. 333-122693; any registration
statements or prospectuses filed in connection with the sale or resale from time to time of
securities of the Company, or amendments or supplements thereto; and in any amendment to any of the
foregoing. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading Experts in any of the
aforementioned documents. 
 
 MINE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES/s/ NEIL B. PRENNName:
    Neil B. PrennTitle:
    PresidentDate:
    January 25, 2006
# C_2023071EN.01000901.xml

| 27.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 January 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy w Warszawie — Poland) — J.K. v TP S.A.

(Case C-356/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Equal treatment in employment and occupation - Directive 2000/78/EC - Article 3(1)(a) and (c) - Conditions for access to self-employment - Employment and working conditions - Prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation - Self-employed person working on the basis of a contract for specific work - Termination and non-renewal of contract - Freedom to choose a contracting party)

(2023/C 71/10)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: J.K.

Defendant: TP S.A.

Intervening party: PTPA

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(1)(a) and (c) of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation

must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which has the effect of excluding, on the basis of the freedom of choice of contracting parties, from the protection against discrimination to be conferred by that directive, the refusal, based on the sexual orientation of a person, to conclude or renew with that person a contract concerning the performance of specific work by that person in the context of the pursuit of a self-employed activity.

---

(1)  OJ C 391, 27.9.2021.

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Michael Reviol BOSELY.

No. 62172.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 5, 1978.

In re: Michael Reviol Bosely applying for writs of review and stay order. Parish of Ouachita.

Writ denied. Adequate remedy by review in event of conviction.