alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020433EN.01001301.xml

| 14.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 433/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 433/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 29 October 2020 — Intercept Pharma Ltd, Intercept Pharmaceuticals Inc. v European Medicines Agency

(Case C-576/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Access to documents of the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the European Union - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Second indent of Article 4(2) - Exception relating to the protection of court proceedings - First indent of Article 4(2) - Exception relating to the protection of commercial interests - Documents submitted in the context of a marketing authorisation application for a medicinal product for human use - Decision to grant a third party access to the documents)

(2020/C 433/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Intercept Pharma Ltd, Intercept Pharmaceuticals Inc. (represented by: L. Tsang, Solicitor and F. Campbell, Barrister and by J. Mulryne and E. Amos, Solicitors)

Other party to the proceedings: European Medicines Agency (represented by: T. Jabłoński, S. Drosos, R. Pita, S. Marino and H. Kerr, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Intercept Pharma Ltd and Intercept Pharmaceuticals Inc. to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Intercept Pharma Ltd and Intercept Pharmaceuticals Inc. to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

---

(1)  OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 28, 2011 

h0620 

Order 

 

June 28, 2011 

142636 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142636 

 COA: 301379 

Jackson CC: 09-006021-FH 

ROBERT LEE-ROY COFFEY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 26, 2011 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATIONS BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Education Management Corporation
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert T. McDowell, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify in such capacity, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods reflected
therein.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: February 9, 2006



By:

/s/    ROBERT T. MCDOWELLRobert T. McDowell Chief Financial Officer
July 16, 1997

18590

#### Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc. v. Rackel

Affirmed
# Attendee Report

Webinar Name Appliance Standards Rulemaking Advisory Actual Start Date/Time Aug 04, 2014 08:40 AM EDT
Mark Ames 1828 L Street NW Washington Other DCASHRAE 20036 Jeremiah Freeman DOE Washington DC 20585 Bert Kessler 15301 Spectrum Dr Addison TX 75001 Michael Lubliner 905 Plum St Olympia Education WAWSU Energy Program 98504 Vrushali Mendon 902 Battelle Blvd. Richland WA 99352 Thomas Ponder 750 East Swedesford Road Valley ForgeManufacturing PA CertainTeed Corporation 19482 Brian Rocky 3110 North Mead Street Wichita Manufacturing KS Johnson Controls Inc 67219 Aniruddh Roy 5151 San Felipe Street, Suite 500 Houston TX Goodman Manufacturing Company, L.P.77056

Peter Schneider128 Lakeside Ave Burlington Energy, Chemical, Utilities VT Efficiency Vermont/VEIC 05401

Don Surrena 1201 15th St. NW Washington DCNational Association of Home Builders 20005 Michael Wade 144 Corporate Way Addison Manufacturing AL Cavalier Homes 35540 Anthony Roy 623 SW Oak Portland OR 97204 Michael Woodford2111 Wilson Blvd., Arlington Manufacturing VA AHRI 22201
# C_2018134EN.01002701.xml

| 16.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/27

---

Action brought on 9 February 2018 — Bekat v EUIPO — Borbet (ARBET)

(Case T-79/18)

(2018/C 134/38)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Arif Oliver Bekat (Esslingen, Germany) (represented by: P. Kohl, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Borbet GmbH (Hallenberg, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant for the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark ARBET — Application for registration No 14 320 915

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 December 2017 in Case R 1117/2017-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and dismiss the intervener’s appeal of 26 May 2017 against the decision of the Opposition Division of 30 March 2017; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and dismiss the intervener’s appeal of 26 May 2017 against the decision of the Opposition Division of 30 March 2017;

| — | order the intervener to pay the costs, including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the intervener to pay the costs, including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001.

---
From: Heidi Haggerty

To: LEVIN, NANCY

Cc: Marina Mejia

Subject: RE: Appendix 2

Date: Friday, April 08, 2016 9:27:53 AM

Hi Nancy,

Yes, that was an error. The correct reference is 40 CFR 52.128, Appendix A(I)(B).

Heidi Haggerty

From: Marina Mejia 

Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 9:15 AM

To: Heidi Haggerty <Haggerty.Heidi@azdeq.gov>

Cc: LEVIN, NANCY <Levin.Nancy@epa.gov>

Subject: FW: Appendix 2

Hi Heidi,

Can you help Nancy please?

Thank you!

Marina

From: LEVIN, NANCY [mailto:Levin.Nancy@epa.gov] 

Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 9:14 AM

To: Marina Mejia <Mejia.Marina@azdeq.gov>

Subject: Appendix 2

Hi Marina,

I’m reviewing the rules submitted with the W. Pinal PM10 Plan and I noticed what

appears to be a typographical in AAC Appendix 2. Test Methods and Protocols

Section L. “40 CFR 51.128, Appendix A(1)(B).” I believe the correct reference is “40

CFR 52.128 Appendix A(1)(B).” Can you confirm? Thanks.

-- Nancy

______________________________________________

Nancy Levin Air Rules Office

415.972.3848 levin.nancy@epa.gov

US EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne St (AIR-4) San Francisco, CA 94105

NOTICE: This e-mail (and any attachments) may contain PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL information and is intended

only for the use of the specific individual(s) to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged and
confidential under state and federal law. This information may be used or disclosed only in accordance with law, and

you may be subject to penalties under law for improper use or further disclosure of the information in this e-mail and

its attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the person named above by reply

e-mail, and then delete the original e-mail. Thank you.
# C_2019065EN.01003801.xml

| 18.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/38

---

Order of the General Court of 11 December 2018 — Hamburg Beer Company v EUIPO (Hamburg BEER COMPANY)

(Case T-5/18) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark Hamburg BEER COMPANY - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law))

(2019/C 65/48)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Hamburg Beer Company GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: O. Spieker, A. Schönfleisch and M. Alber, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 September 2017 (Case R 436/2017-5) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign Hamburg BEER COMPANY as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly lacking any foundation in law.

| 2. | Hamburg Beer Company GmbH shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Hamburg Beer Company GmbH shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 72, 26.2.2018.

---
# C_2019065EN.01004601.xml

| 18.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/46

---

Action brought on 26 December 2018 — C&A v EUIPO (#BESTDEAL)

(Case T-753/18)

(2019/C 65/60)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: C&A AG (Zug, Switzerland) (represented by: P. Koch Moreno, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark #BESTDEAL in white — Application for registration No 17 681 826

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 October 2018 in Case R 1234/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare the grounds of the action well-founded and annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the grounds of the action well-founded and annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs should it appear in the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs should it appear in the present proceedings.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of the principle of legal certainty and equal treatment. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of the principle of legal certainty and equal treatment.

---
July 8, 1999

21913

#### Choe v. Administrative Director of the Courts, State of Hawaii

Affirmed
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

 REGION 4

 ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER

 61 FORSYTH STREET

 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960

March 9, 2015 

Sheila Holman, Director 

Division of Air Quality 

North Carolina Dept. of 

 Environment and Natural Resources 

1641 Mail Service Center 

Raleigh, NC 27699-1641 

Dear Ms. Holman: 

Enclosed is the final end-of-year report for your agency’s FY 2014 Air Pollution Control grant 

authorized by §105 of the Clean Air Act. This report outlines your agency’s various grant commitments 

and their status. Since there were no issues, your report is now finalized. This letter documents the 

conclusion of the joint evaluation process required by 40 Code of Federal Regulations 35.115 and 

identified as a commitment in your FY 2014 Air Planning Agreement under Cross Cutting Issues. 

We appreciate the progress you made in FY 2014 and look forward to continuing our joint efforts to 

protect and improve air quality. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Stuart Perry at 

(404) 562-8980 or Shantel Shelmon at (404) 562-9817. 

 

 Sincerely, 

 Beverly H. Banister 

 Director 

 Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division 

Enclosure
Interstate

transport

Yes to A or B

No to A and B 

Intrastate 

transport

Will the material be received via Domestic Transport?

Is the material 

-a livestock or poultry pathogen 1,2 OR

-a vector (e.g. arthropods, animal tissues) infected 

with a livestock or poultry pathogen? OR

-a tick or screwworm?

(A) Is the material 

-a livestock or poultry pathogen 2 (including pathogens that 

have been killed/inactivated), 

-a derivative of a livestock or poultry pathogen (including 

DNA/RNA and recombinants) or

-a vector (e.g. arthropods, animal tissues) for a livestock or 

poultry pathogen?

OR

(B) Was the organism or vector exposed to any animals or 

animal products (e.g. eggs, fetal bovine serum) 

VS 16-6 transport permit 

required No VS 16-6 permit required 3

VS 16-6 import permit 

required

Will the material be received via Import?

Yes No

Is an OV VS 16-6 permit required?

Sept. 18, 2019

1 Regulated aquatic pathogens for interstate transport are: Infectious salmon anemia virus and Spring viremia of carp virus

2 Excluding Select Agents (SA) and toxins. The Federal Select Agent program regulates SA and SA toxins. A list of select agents can be found at: https://www.selectagents.gov

3 See guidelines for no permit required. Follow instructions listed in the appropriate import OR interstate transport guideline

Can the material be imported using a 

Guideline for No Import Permit Required 3 ?

Yes No
#### Robert CROW, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee.

No. 1966.

Supreme Court of Alaska.

Dec. 28, 1973.

*757Herbert D. Soil, Public Defender, Anchorage, Stephen R. Cline, Asst. Public Defender, Fairbanks, for appellant.

John E. Havelock, Atty. Gen., Juneau, Monroe N. Clayton, Dist. Atty., James M. Hackett, Asst. Dist. Atty., Fairbanks, for appellee.

Before CONNOR, ERWIN, BOOCH-EVER and FITZGERALD, Justices.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal it is claimed that a sentence of five years’ imprisonment, with two years suspended on condition of good behavior, is excessive for a first felony conviction.

Appellant pleaded guilty to the crime of assault with a dangerous weapon, which arose from a shooting incident at Circle City, Alaska. The superior court found him guilty based upon his plea, and imposed the aforementioned sentence.

Appellant has eighty-one prior misdemeanors on his record, including five convictions for assault and battery and six for larceny. By his own estimate, appellant has spent eight of the past ten years in jail.

Prior psychiatric and psychological evaluations have shown appellant to be an “immature individual with poor impulse control and a great deal of underlying hostility” whose behavioral problems are further compounded by chronic alcoholism. He was not viewed as a proper candidate for psychiatric treatment. There is no indication that appellant’s condition had changed at the time of this sentencing.

In view of appellant’s recidivism and the duty of the court to protect society, we do not find the sentence imposed to be outside the zone of reasonableness.1

Affirmed.

RABINOWITZ, C. J., not participating.

1

. Kriska v. State, 501 P.2d 159 (Alaska 1972).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          42,500
<SECURITIES>                                    12,600
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,200
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                92,700
<PP&E>                                       1,227,700
<DEPRECIATION>                                 174,300
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,150,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           62,600
<BONDS>                                        570,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     502,700
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,150,700
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               147,300
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   90,700
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   600
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 47,100
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             47,100
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    47,100
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.65
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997             MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                           4,053                  16,982
<SECURITIES>                                     7,329                  10,010
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,105                  15,259
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,388                  44,514
<PP&E>                                           3,242                   3,413
<DEPRECIATION>                                     297                     261
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  45,978                  50,073
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,799                   9,965
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        32,139                  31,521
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,786                   6,465
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    45,978                  50,073
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,642                  14,224
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,481                   5,967
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,643                   6,755
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5                       3
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (411)                   1,736
<INCOME-TAX>                                       145                     661
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (266)                   1,075
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.24)                     .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.24)                     .10
        

</TABLE>