alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2018161EN.01007201.xml

| 7.5.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/72 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.5.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/72

---

Action brought on 16 March 2018 — Rietze v EUIPO — Volkswagen (Motor vehicles)

(Case T-192/18)

(2018/C 161/90)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Rietze GmbH & Co. KG (Altdorf, Germany) (represented by: M. Krogmann, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Volkswagen AG (Wolfsburg, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the design at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the design at issue:

Design at issue: International registration No DM/073118-3 designating the European Union

Design at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 January 2018 in Case R 1244/2016-3

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal and declare the effect of the international registration of design DM/073118-3 in the European Union to be null and void; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal and declare the effect of the international registration of design DM/073118-3 in the European Union to be null and void;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 4(1), in conjunction with Article 6(1)(b), of Regulation No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 4(1), in conjunction with Article 6(1)(b), of Regulation No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 6(2) of Regulation No 6/2002. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 6(2) of Regulation No 6/2002.

---
Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) 

Site Related Environmental 

Assessment Program

3M and Dyneon LLC

Decatur, Alabama 

Raw Data Appendices: April 1, 2012 to June 30, 2012 

Quarterly Status Report

Volume 1

GLP10-01-01 INTERIM REPORT 26

GLP10-01-01 INTERIM REPORT 27

GLP10-01-01 INTERIM REPORT 28

GLP10-01-01 INTERIM REPORT 29

11P-0094-v2-1 one

3M Company

St. Paul, Minnesota

®
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 99.1



      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 Terra Nitrogen Company, L.P.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "report"), the
undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that based on their best 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.



/s/ Michael L. Bennett
--------------------------------------------------
Michael L. Bennett, Chief Executive Officer



/s/ Francis G. Meyer
--------------------------------------------------
Francis G. Meyer, Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 21

                                  SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                               PERCENTAGE          STATE OF
SUBSIDIARIES (1)                                  OWNED          INCORPORATION
----------------                               ----------        -------------

<S>                                               <C>            <C>
Ameriana Bank and Trust of Indiana (2)            100%           United States

Indiana Title Insurance Company (2)               100%           Indiana

Ameriana Insurance Agency, Inc. (2)               100%           Indiana

Ameriana Financial Services, Inc. (3)             100%           Indiana

Family Financial Life Insurance Company (4)        14%           Louisiana

Deer Park Service Corporation (2)                 100%           Ohio
<FN>
_____________
(1)  Operations of the Company's wholly-owned direct subsidiaries, Ameriana Bank
     and Trust of Indiana,  Ameriana  Insurance  Agency,  Inc. and Indiana Title
     Insurance  Company,  and Ameriana Bank and Trust of Indiana's  wholly-owned
     subsidiary,   Ameriana  Financial  Services,  Inc.,  are  included  in  the
     Company's  consolidated  financial statements attached as an exhibit to the
     Annual Report.
(2)  First-tier subsidiary of the Company.
(3)  Second-tier subsidiary of the Company 100% owned by Ameriana Bank and Trust
     of Indiana, a first-tier subsidiary of the Company.
(4)  Third-tier  subsidiary of the Company 1/7th owned through stock  investment
     and less  than  1/7th  owned  through  partnership  interests  of  Ameriana
     Financial  Services,  Inc., a  second-tier  subsidiary  of the Company 100%
     owned by Ameriana Bank and Trust of Indiana, a first-tier subsidiary of the
     Company.
</FN>
</TABLE>
# C_2020103EN.01002701.xml

| 30.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 103/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/27

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — Mende Omalanga v Council

(Case T-176/18) (1)

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo - Freezing of funds - Renewal of the listing of the applicant’s name on the list of persons concerned - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Obligation for the Council to communicate the new elements justifying the renewal of the restrictive measures - Error of law - Manifest error of assessment - Right to property - Right to respect for private and family life - Proportionality - Presumption of innocence - Plea of illegality - Modification of the forms of order sought)

(2020/C 103/37)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Lambert Mende Omalanga (Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, S. Lejeune and H. Marcos Fraile, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action based on Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2282 of 11 December 2017 amending Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2017 L 328, p. 19), of Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2018/569 of 12 April 2018 implementing Decision 2010/788/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 95, p. 21), and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/566 of 12 April 2018 implementing Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against persons acting in violation of the arms embargo with regard to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (OJ 2018 L 95, p. 9), in so far as those acts concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Lambert Mende Omalanga to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Lambert Mende Omalanga to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 7.5.2018.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 21
                                                                      ----------

                              List of Subsidiaries

                                       of

                        Matthews Studio Equipment Group



1.   Hollywood Rental Company, LLC
     -----------------------------
     State of Formation:  Delaware

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     Hollywood Rental Company, LLC
     Hollywood Rental Company

2.   Matthews Acceptance Corporation
     -------------------------------
     State of Incorporation:  California

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     Matthews Acceptance Corporation
     MAC

3.   Matthews Studio Electronics, Inc.
     ---------------------------------
     State of Incorporation:  California

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     Matthews Studio Electronics, Inc.
     Matthews Studio Electronics

4.   Duke City Video, Inc.
     ---------------------
     State of Incorporation:  New Mexico

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     Duke City Video, Inc.
     DCDUBS
     Duke City Dallas
     Duke City Studios
     Duke City West
<PAGE>

5.   Matthews Studio Group Centers, Inc.
     -----------------------------------
     State of Incorporation:  California

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     Matthews Studio Group Centers, Inc.
     Matthews Studio Group Centers - Nevada, Inc.

6.   Matthews Studio Sales, Inc.
     ---------------------------
     State of Incorporation:  California

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     Matthews Studio Sales, Inc.
     ESS
     ESS International
     Expendable Supply Store

7.   HDI Holdings, Inc.
     ------------------
     State of Incorporation:  Kentucky

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     HDI Holdings, Inc.
     HDI

8.   Four Star Lighting, Inc.
     ------------------------
     State of Incorporation:  New York

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     Four Star Lighting, Inc.
     Four Star Stage Lighting, Inc.

9.   ShowbizMart.com Inc.
     --------------------
     State of Incorporation:  Delaware

     Names Under Which Subsidiary Conducts Business:

     ShowbizMart.com

                                      -2-
cool_ex1061.htm

EXHIBIT 10.61
 
  
 
 
 
	 
	1

	

	 


 
 
	 
	2

	

	 


 
 
	 
	3

	

	 


 
 
	 
	4

	

	 


 
 
	 
	5

	

	 


 
 
	 
	6

	

	 


 
 
	 
	7

	

	 


 
 
	 
	8

	

	 


 
 
	 
	9

	

	 


 
 
	10
# C_2019172EN.01003401.xml

| 20.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 172/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 172/34

---

Order of the General Court of 25 March 2019 — Abaco Energy and Others v Commission

(Case T-186/18) (1)

(Actions for annulment - State aid - Aid scheme for renewable energies - Preliminary examination procedure - Decision finding the aid scheme compatible with the internal market - Action brought by recipients - No interest in bringing proceedings - Inadmissibility)

(2019/C 172/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Abaco Energy, SA (Madrid, Spain) and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex (represented by: initially P. Holtrop, P. Kuypers and M. de Wit, and subsequently P. Holtrop, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche, P. Němečková and S. Noë, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2017) 7384 final of 10 November 2017 relating to State aid SA.40348 (2015/NN) implemented by the Kingdom of Spain (Support for electricity generation from renewable energy sources, cogeneration and waste).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | There is no need to rule on the applications to intervene of the Kingdom of Spain or EDP España. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no need to rule on the applications to intervene of the Kingdom of Spain or EDP España.

| 3. | Abaco Energy, SA, and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex, shall bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission, with the exception of the costs relating to the applications to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Abaco Energy, SA, and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex, shall bear their own costs and those incurred by the European Commission, with the exception of the costs relating to the applications to intervene.

| 4. | Abaco Energy and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex, the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain and EDP España shall bear their own costs relating to the applications to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Abaco Energy and the other applicants whose names are listed in the annex, the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain and EDP España shall bear their own costs relating to the applications to intervene.

---

(1)  OJ C 221, 25.6.2018.

---
# C_2021329EN.01000201.xml

| 16.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 1 July 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia — Spain) — CB v Tribunal Económico-Administrativo Regional de Galicia

(Case C-521/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Tax inspection - Supply of services as an activity of an agent for performing artists - Transactions subject to VAT - Transactions not declared to the tax authority and not invoiced - Fraud - Reconstitution of the taxable amount for income tax purposes - Principle of VAT neutrality - Inclusion of VAT in the reconstituted taxable amount)

(2021/C 329/02)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Galicia

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: CB

Defendant: Tribunal Económico-Administrativo Regional de Galicia

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, in particular Articles 73 and 78 thereof, read in the light of the principle of neutrality of value added tax (VAT), must be interpreted as meaning that, where taxable persons for VAT purposes, by fraud, have not indicated the existence of the transaction to the tax authority, issued invoices or shown the income generated during that transaction in a direct tax declaration, the reconstitution, as part of an inspection of that declaration, of the amounts paid and received during the transaction at issue by the tax authority concerned must be regarded as a price already including VAT, unless, under national law, the taxable persons have the possibility of subsequently passing on and deducting the VAT at issue, notwithstanding the fraud.

---

(1)  OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.

---
July 15, 1997

18363

#### Daitz v. State

Affirmed
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Todd E. Wille, certify that:

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Unify Corporation;

2.Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants third fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5.The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

| | /s/ TODD E. WILLE                     | 
| | ------------------------------------- | 
| | Todd E. Wille                        
| | President and Chief Executive Officer
| | (Principal Executive Officer)        

Dated: September 13, 2007

28

---
# C_2021044EN.01000602.xml

| 8.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 10 December 2020 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-347/19) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Environment - Energy efficiency - Directive 2012/27/EU - Article 9(3) - Heating, cooling and hot water consumption - Installation of individual consumption meters in buildings)

(2021/C 44/07)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: K. Talabér-Ritz, S. Pardo Quintillán and Y. G. Marinova, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: L. Aguilera Ruiz, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed time limit, all the necessary national provisions to comply with Article 9(3) of Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on energy efficiency, amending Directives 2009/125/EC and 2010/30/EU and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC and 2006/32/EC, relating to the installation in buildings of devices for the individual measurement of heating, cooling and hot water consumption, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that provision; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed time limit, all the necessary national provisions to comply with Article 9(3) of Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on energy efficiency, amending Directives 2009/125/EC and 2010/30/EU and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC and 2006/32/EC, relating to the installation in buildings of devices for the individual measurement of heating, cooling and hot water consumption, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under that provision;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 238, 15.7.2019.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1001 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1001

To establish authorization levels for general business loans for fiscal 
                          years 2015 and 2016.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 16, 2015

  Mr. Risch (for himself, Mr. Peters, Mr. Gardner, and Mrs. Shaheen) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
            Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To establish authorization levels for general business loans for fiscal 
                          years 2015 and 2016.

    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 ``Small Business Lending 
Reauthorization Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. GENERAL BUSINESS LOANS AUTHORIZATION.

    Section 20 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 note) is 
amended--
            (1) by redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (f); and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(g) Fiscal Year 2015.--For fiscal year 2015, the Administrator is 
authorized to make $20,500,000,000 in general business loans, as 
provided in section 7(a).
    ``(h) Fiscal Year 2016.--For fiscal year 2016, the Administrator is 
authorized to make $23,500,000,000 in general business loans, as 
provided in section 7(a).''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.1****Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Neenah Enterprises, Inc.pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002**Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer,and Corporate Vice President — Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Neenah Enterprises, Inc. (the“Company”), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of theCompany for the year ended September 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.DATE: December 28, 2007       /s/Robert E. Ostendorf, Jr. Robert E. Ostendorf, Jr.    President and Chief Executive Officer         /s/Gary W. LaChey Gary W. LaChey    Corporate Vice President — Finance    and Chief Financial Officer  
130