alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019044EN.01007302.xml

| 4.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/73 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/73

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 25 October 2018 — JPMorgan Chase and Others v Commission

(Case T-420/18 R)

((Application for interim measures - Competition - Euro Interbank Offered Rates (Euribor) - Euro Interest Rate Derivatives (EIRD) - Rejection of the request for confidential treatment of a decision establishing an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Principle of the presumption of innocence - Application for interim measures - No prima facie case))

(2019/C 44/97)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: JPMorgan Chase & Co (New York, New York, United States), JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association (Columbus, Ohio, United States), J. P. Morgan Services LLP (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: M. Lester QC, D. Piccinin, D. Heaton, Barristers, B. Tormey, N. French, N. Frey and D. Das, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Farley, B. Mongin and F. van Schaik, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking, first, a stay on the operation of Commission Decision C(2018) 2745 final of 27 April 2018, on objections to the disclosure of information by their publication raised by JPMorgan Chase & Co., JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association and J.P. Morgan Services, in accordance with Article 8 of Decision 2011/695/EU of the President of the European Commission of 13 October 2011 on the function and terms of reference of the hearing officer in certain competition proceedings (Case AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives (EIRD)), and, second, an order requiring the Commission to refrain from publishing Commission Decision C(2016) 8530 final of 7 December 2016 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (Case AT.39914 — Euro Interest Rate Derivatives (EIRD)).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The order of 11 July 2018, JPMorgan Chase and Others v Commission (T-420/18 R), is cancelled. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The order of 11 July 2018, JPMorgan Chase and Others v Commission (T-420/18 R), is cancelled.

| 3. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The costs are reserved.

---
#### Jacobi v. United Nat’l Ins. Co.

15854

12/21/94

Affirmed
[No. 38208.

Department Two.

December 30, 1965.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Thomas Russell Johnson, *Appellant.****

*Torbenson, Thatcher, Stevenson & Burns,*for appellant.

*Charles O. Carroll*and *Robert E. Dixon,*for respondent.

*

Reported in 409 P.2d 655.

Per Curiam.

— Defendant pleaded not guilty by reason of mental irresponsibility, but was nevertheless found guilty on three counts of burglary in the second degree. He appeals from the judgment and sentence and from the order denying his motion in arrest of judgment.

Defendant did not take the stand. His only witness, a psychiatrist, testified that in his opinion defendant was unable to distinguish right from wrong at the time of the alleged acts. On cross-examination the doctor testified that had it not been for the burglaries the defendant’s mental condition was such that he would not have found him com*672mittable to a state hospital; that defendant was not schizophrenic; that he did not suffer from delusions or hallucinations; that liquor was a major factor in motivating defendant’s behavior at the time of the burglaries.

Defendant urges on appeal — as was urged in *State v. Putzell,*40 Wn.2d 174, 179, 242 P.2d 180 (1952) — that the verdict of the jury finding him guilty implicitly and necessarily finds that he was mentally responsible at the time of the burglaries, and that such finding is diametrically opposed to all of the undisputed testimony on the question of insanity; hence, it was error to deny defendant’s motion in arrest of judgment and sentence. We agree with his thesis, but disagree with his conclusion.

No error is assigned to the court’s instruction that:

> A plea of insanity or mental irresponsibility on behalf of the defendant having been interposed herein, the jury is instructed that every man is presumed to be sane and to intend the natural and usual consequence of his own acts. As the law presumes a man to be sane until the contrary is shown, I charge you that the burden of proving insanity as a defense to a crime is upon the defendant to establish by a preponderance of the evidence, and unless insanity is established by a fair preponderance of the evidence, the presumption of sanity must prevail.

*It*became the duty of the jury to consider the evidence and the law as given to it in the court’s instructions. The jury was not bound by the conclusion of the doctor in answer to hypothetical questions. As the court said in *State v. Putzell, supra:*

> The ultimate conclusion, and the ultimate decision as to the sanity or insanity of appellant, upon all of the evidence in the case, and the law, as given to it by the court, was the responsibility of the jury.

The jury is not obliged to accept the psychiatric testimony unless it finds that the testimony overcomes the presumption of sanity as set forth in the court’s unchallenged instruction, which we have quoted *supra.*

The judgment is affirmed.
Page 1 of 2 

Revision: May 2012 

National Veterinary Services Laboratories 

Salmonella Serotyping 

Proficiency Test Summary 

1. Composition of proficiency test panel: The panel consists of 10 isolates of Salmonella of 

various serotypes inoculated into Trypticase Soy Agar (TSA). The samples are labeled with 

numbers 1-10. The test is offered in conjunction with the National Poultry Improvement Plan 

(NPIP). 

2. Cost of proficiency test: Click here to view current NVSL Catalog of Reagents. Additional 

information on diagnostic reagents including: ordering, payments, shipping details and fees can 

be located at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/lab_info_services/reagents.shtml. 

3. Storage conditions: The samples will be sent on ice pack; however, they can be left at room 

temperature upon receipt. It is recommended that samples be set up as soon as they are received. 

4. Sample preparation/selection criteria: Samples are chosen based on serotypes that are 

received at the NVSL for testing. Serotype determination prior to including in panel will be 

confirmed by classical and molecular typing. 

5. Panel quality control: After isolates have been chosen for inclusion in panel, they will be 

inoculated into TSA. Ten percent of the complete panels will be randomly selected and 

processed blindly by NVSL staff to ensure that the isolates can be recovered and correctly 

identified. 

6. Timing of the proficiency test distribution and data collection: The Salmonella serotyping 

proficiency test is offered once a year. Results are to be submitted to NVSL within 30 days of 

receipt. 

7. Test method: Individual laboratories should treat the isolates in the same fashion that they 

would treat a normal diagnostic sample. Testing methods are based on individual lab protocols. 

8. Submitting test results: Participating laboratories are required to have data submitted for 

scoring no more than thirty days after receipt. Results are reported to the NVSL by fax, mail, or 

email. 

9. Scoring of individual panel samples: For each sample, scoring is based on correct 

serogrouping of O antigen, and if laboratory does complete serotyping, correct identification of 

“H” antigens. 
Page 2 of 2 

Revision: May 2012 

10. Laboratory pass/fail criteria: At this point, this test is being offered to evaluate laboratories 

doing testing, and a grade will not be assigned. 

11. Reporting laboratory test scores: Results for each laboratory are reported to the individual 

laboratory director. Final results are compiled and reported within 60 days of the deadline for 

receipt of participants’ results. Results of individual laboratories are reported only to that 

laboratory, and summary results from all laboratories are provided as part of the final report. 

12. Remedial actions required for failing laboratories: N/A 

13. Special requirements: A valid USDA transport permit is required to receive the proficiency 

test. A copy of the permit must be provided to NVSL prior to shipment.
Safeguarding American Agriculture

Federal Relay Service

 APHIS is an agency of USDA’s Marketing and Regulatory Programs (Voice/TTY/ASCII/Spanish)

An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer 1-800-877-8339

September 28, 2004

CENTER FOR VETERINARY BIOLOGICS NOTICE NO. 04-16

Subject: Efficacy Requirements and Label Claims for Bovine Rotavirus Vaccine

To: Biologics Licensees, Permittees, and Applicants

Directors, Center for Veterinary Biologics

I. PURPOSE

This notice informs licensees, permittees, and applicants of current Center for Veterinary

Biologics policy concerning efficacy requirements and label claims for Bovine Rotavirus

Vaccine.

II. BACKGROUND

Infection with bovine rotavirus, most commonly group A rotavirus, can cause diarrhea in

neonatal calves. Among the bovine group A rotavirus, eight glycoprotein (G) serotypes

have been reported. Although the most commonly recognized G serotypes are G6 and

G10, there have been reports of other G serotypes isolated from diarrheic calves in the

United States and other parts of the world. The cross-protection provided by these

serotypes is known to be very limited. This notice clarifies the type of label claims that can

be made for rotavirus vaccines, and the efficacy data needed to support these label claims.

III. POLICY

Label claims may only be made for those G serotypes where protection has been

demonstrated by satisfactory vaccination-challenge studies in calves. The primary variable

should be diarrhea. Fecal shedding of rotavirus may be considered as a secondary variable.

Firms should provide data confirming that the cause of post-challenge diarrhea was the

challenge virus, ruling out other bacterial and viral enteropathogens. All licenses issued

subsequent to October 31, 2004, for products containing bovine rotavirus should conform

to this guideline. Labels and promotional materials for previously licensed products should

be amended, as necessary, by October 31, 2005.

/s/ Richard E. Hill, Jr.

Richard E. Hill, Jr.

Director

Center for Veterinary Biologics

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Animal and Plant

Health Inspection

Service

Veterinary Services

Center for Veterinary

Biologics

510 S. 17th Street,

Suite 104

Ames, IA 50010

(515) 232-5785

FAX (515) 232-7120
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





Each of
the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.





This
6 th day of
May, 2005.





/s/ R.
Daniel Blanton


R. Daniel
Blanton


President
&


Chief
Executive Officer


(Principal
executive officer)





/s/
Ronald L. Thigpen


Ronald L.
Thigpen


Executive
Vice President &


Chief
Operating Officer


(Principal
financial officer)
PMN Substance A Estimated Composition 

PMN substance A is the sodium salt of a sulfated branched and linear alcohol 

propoxylate. The branched and linear alcohol propoxylate is defined by CAS 

number 958238-74-9. The branched and linear alcohol propoxylate is sulfated 

using standard methods and then neutralized with aqueous sodium hydroxide. 

Water may be added to adjust the viscosity of the final product. This makes a 

20% to 70% active material, most preferred 27-30% active, (PMN substance A) 

in water.

After sulfation and neutralization to make PMN Substance A, there remains a 

small amount of free oil (non sulfated propoxylate) remaining. This will vary with 

the sulfation severity. In laboratory experiments this is typically less than 3%. 

REPRESENTATIVE STRUCTURES

PMN Substance A (100% active basis)

R-O-(CH2CH(CH3)O)nSO3Na

n = targeted 4 or 8 but may range from 1 to 20, actual 

distribution 1 to 30

R = C12 to C13 branched and linear alkane (from the alcohol)

The material is described by CAS # 958238-81-8

97-99%

R-O-(CH2CH(CH3)O)nH

n = targeted 4 or 8 but may range from 1 to 20, actual 

distribution 1 to 30

R = C12 to C13 branched and linear alkane

The material is described by CAS # 958238-74-9

≤3%
# C_2021044EN.01000601.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 (Second Chamber) of 10 December 2020 — Comune di Milano v European Commission

(Case C-160/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Air transport sector - Groundhandling services at Milan-Linate (Italy) and Milan-Malpensa (Italy) airports - Capital injections made by the operator of those airports into its wholly owned subsidiary providing those services - Public shareholding of the operator - Decision declaring those State aid measures unlawful and incompatible with the internal market - Article 107(1) TFEU - Concepts of ‘State resources’, ‘measure imputable to the State’ and ‘economic advantage’ - Private operator principle - Private investor test - Burden of proof - Complex financial assessments - Intensity of judicial review - Distortion of the evidence)

(2021/C 44/06)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Appellant: Comune di Milano (represented by: A. Mandarano, E. Barbagiovanni, S. Grassani and L. Picciano, avvocati)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: D. Recchia, G. Conte and D. Grespan, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders the Comune di Milano to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Comune di Milano to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 131, 8.4.2019.

---
Cyprus

APHIS recognizes only that area of Cyprus that is labeled “Area controlled by Cyprus 

Government (Greek Cypriot area)” in the map above as 

• low risk for classical swine fever

• free of foot-and-mouth disease; and

• free of swine vesicular disease.
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements and
in their related prospectuses of Cornerstone Realty Income Trust, Inc., as
listed below, of our report dated February 12, 2003, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Cornerstone Realty Income
Trust, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2002.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
    Registration
    Statement No.                          Description
       <C>                 <S>
      333-24871         Form S-8, pertaining to the Company's 1992 Non-Employee Directors Stock Option
                        Plan, Special Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan and Non-Employee Directors
                        Fees Plan

      333-24875         Form S-8, pertaining to the Company's 1992 Incentive Plan

      333-34441         Form S-3, Shelf Registration Statement, pertaining to
                        the registration of $200 million of Common Shares,
                        Preferred Shares and Debt Securities

      333-65576         Form S-3, pertaining to the Company's Dividend Reinvestment and Share Purchase
                        Plan

      333-89227         Form S-8, pertaining to the issuance of Series A
                        Convertible Preferred Shares in connection with the 1996
                        Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan and its 1996
                        Incentive Plan of an acquired entity (Apple Residential
                        Income Trust, Inc.)

      333-100198        Form S-3, pertaining to the registration of common
                        shares to be issued in redemption of partnership units
                        of Cornerstone NC Operating Limited Partnership

</TABLE>

                                            /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
                                            Richmond, Virginia
                                            March 27, 2003
#### In the Matter of The FINANCIAL INDEX CO., Inc., Bankrupt-Appellant.

No. 213, Docket 28463.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 19, 1963.

Decided Nov. 22, 1963.

The Financial Index Co., Inc., bankrupt-appellant, pro se.

Black & Plante, White River Junction, Vt., for petitioning creditors.

Before MEDINA, WATERMAN and MARSHALL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

On consent of appellees this case in bankruptcy is remanded to the District Court for the District of Vermont for a trial of the issues relative to jurisdiction, alleged acts of bankruptcy and the status of the alleged petitioning creditors at the time of the filing of the petition in bankruptcy. As the amounts involved are small and appellant’s witnesses, or some of them, must travel from New York City to Vermont for the trial, we suggest that all allegations of the petition be deemed denied and that at least ten days notice of the time and place of the hearing be given to appellant at Fifth Floor, 2 John Street, New York 38, N. Y. If appellant prefers to serve an answer it may do so, at least five days before the date fixed for the hearing. Whether some of appellant’s motion papers were lost on the subway in New York City has no relevancy to any of the issues arising out of the petition in bankruptcy, so far as we can see. Nor does the record disclose any reason to suppose that the statement that the papers were lost is a fabrication.

Remanded.
# C_2018352EN.01004101.xml

| 1.10.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 352/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.10.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 352/41

---

Action brought on 6 August 2018 — Veit v ECB

(Case T-474/18)

(2018/C 352/49)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Sebastian Veit (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: K. Kujath, lawyer)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s decision of 3 January 2018 concerning the applicant’s classification with effect from 1 January 2018, in so far as it attributes to the applicant only salary step 17 in salary band F/G; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision of 3 January 2018 concerning the applicant’s classification with effect from 1 January 2018, in so far as it attributes to the applicant only salary step 17 in salary band F/G;

| — | annul the defendant’s decision of 25 May 2018 rejecting the applicant’s application to be attributed salary step 83 in salary band F/G with effect from 1 January 2018; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision of 25 May 2018 rejecting the applicant’s application to be attributed salary step 83 in salary band F/G with effect from 1 January 2018;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The action is based on the following pleas in law:

| 1. | Infringement of the principle of equal treatment
  The first plea in law alleges that the defendant took only limited account of relevant professional experience in the case of internal candidates, in contrast to external candidates, who were in a comparable situation in an identical selection procedure. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Infringement of the principle of equal treatment

The first plea in law alleges that the defendant took only limited account of relevant professional experience in the case of internal candidates, in contrast to external candidates, who were in a comparable situation in an identical selection procedure.

| 2. | Infringement of the principle of the general duty of care
  The second plea in law alleges that the defendant, without objective justification, treated the applicant, as a member of its own staff, less favourably in the classification than it treated candidates who were not yet employed by it. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Infringement of the principle of the general duty of care

The second plea in law alleges that the defendant, without objective justification, treated the applicant, as a member of its own staff, less favourably in the classification than it treated candidates who were not yet employed by it.

---
18669

#### Decker v. Rivera

February 24, 1997

Order No. 97-20

Affirmed
October 2022

There were 9 surveillance inspections conducted at 9 different sites for a total of 66

fish sampled this month. Samples are targeted to moribund and fresh mortalities. The 

water temperatures remained steady. Routine harvest continued. All sites with fish in 

the water remained Category 1 and were scheduled for monthly sampling.

Date Number of 

Samples

Confirmed Positive Cages Cumulative 

Program Samples

November 2021 89 0 24361

December 2021 80 0 24441

January 2022 80 0 24521

February 2022 90 0 24611

March 2022 98 0 24709

April 2022 69 0 24778

May 2022 55 0 24833

June 2022 104 0 24937

July 2022 120 1 25057

August 2022 81 0 25138

September 2022 74 0 25212

October 2022 66 0 25278
UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT F OR THE D ISTRIC T OF CO LU M BIA

__________________________________________) ROLEX WATCH U.S.A., INC., ) ) P la in t if f, ) ) v. ) Ci vilNo . 0 7- 27 2 ( RC L) ) VA RI OU S JO HN DO ES N OS. 1–30 0, and ) XYZCOMP ANIES NOS. 1–20, ) ) De fend ant s. ) __________________________________________) MEMORAN DUM The Court will, in a separ ate Or der issued toda y , g rant plaintiff’ s Motion [ 56] for Entry of Def ault J udg ment. The Clerk of the Court enter ed def

ault as to all defe ndants on Fe bruar y 17, 20 09 . A ll d e fe nd ants have fa ile d to re sp on d to the e ntr y of de fa ult
. Notice of the entry of def ault ag ainst defe ndants Abdul Ali, J ian Xiu, Kama r Adu, Mohammed Abdil, and Minh Nguy en wa s not mailed beca use these de fenda

nts have no fixed addre ss known by

the Court. These de fenda nts—havingbeen pe rsonally serve d on May

29, October 30, Dec ember

6, or De cembe r 12 of 2008 (seeReturn of Servic e [40] , [46] )—ar e responsible for

appra ising the Court of a n addre ss for cor

responde nce, see L ocal Civ. R. 11.1,
and the ir fa ilure to d o s o d oe s n ot p re c lud e de fa ult jud g me nt.
Signed by Roy ce C. L amber

th, Chief J udg e, on Mar ch 31, 2009.
# C_2018427EN.01010303.xml

| 26.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 427/103 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 427/103

---

Order of the General Court of 18 September 2018 — Delfant-Hoylaerts v Commission

(Case T-17/18) (1)

(2018/C 427/138)

Language of the case: French

The President of the Fourth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 104, 19.3.2018.

---