alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020230EN.01001401.xml

| 13.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 230/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 230/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 April 2020 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-406/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Spain - Withdrawal of recognition of producer organisations - Non-recovery of aid paid - Burden of proof - Flat-rate financial correction)

(2020/C 230/18)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and J. Aquilina, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: S. Jiménez García, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 20 March 2019, Spain v Commission (T-237/17, not published, EU:T:2019:172), inasmuch as, by that judgment, the General Court annulled Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/264 of 14 February 2017 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), in so far as it applies a flat-rate correction of 10 % on certain expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Spain; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 20 March 2019, Spain v Commission (T-237/17, not published, EU:T:2019:172), inasmuch as, by that judgment, the General Court annulled Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/264 of 14 February 2017 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), in so far as it applies a flat-rate correction of 10 % on certain expenditure incurred by the Kingdom of Spain;

| 2. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action;

| 3. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs relating to both the proceedings at first instance in Case T-237/17 and the appeal proceedings, and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission relating to both proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs relating to both the proceedings at first instance in Case T-237/17 and the appeal proceedings, and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission relating to both proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 280, 19.8.2019.

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATE**

 

Asrequired by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as amended by Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I certify that:

 

•                                          the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K forthe fiscal year ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

•                                          the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultof operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
|   | /s/ Mitchell Sepaniak        |   |
|--------|------------------------------|--------|
|   | Mitchell Sepaniak            |
|   | Chief Executive Officer      |
|   | Date: October 12,  2004 |

 

----
#### In the Matter of Evelyn D. Morrisey, Petitioner, v Edward V. Regan, as State Comptroller of the State of New York, Respondent.

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which denied petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits.

Contrary to petitioner’s contention, there is substantial evidence in the record to support respondent’s determination that she is not permanently disabled from performing her duties as a professor *(see, Matter of DiFede v Regan,*130 AD2d 832). The medical evidence showed conflicting diagnoses as to the cause and extent of petitioner’s disability. It was for respondent to evaluate this medical evidence *(see, Matter of Curley v Regan,*102 AD2d 939) and he could accord more weight to the opinion of one physician over another *(see, Matter of Clay v Regan,*90 AD2d 625). Here, respondent could properly credit the opinion of the physician for the State Employees’ Retirement System that petitioner was not sufficiently disabled to prevent her from performing her occupation and that disability on the basis of her accident was not justified *(see, supra).*Petitioner’s remaining contention has been reviewed and found to be lacking in merit.

Casey, J. P., Weiss, Yesawich Jr., Mercure and Harvey, JJ. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs.
#### In the Matter of Richard A. Acer, Petitioner, v State of New York Department of Motor Vehicles et al., Respondents.

— Determination unanimously confirmed without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: This proceeding, transferred to our Court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (g), seeks to review a determination of respondent Commissioner which, following a hearing, found that petitioner had failed to comply with respondent’s regulations relating to the documents required on the sale of a vehicle and had engaged in fraudulent practices in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 415 (9) (c). Petitioner is a used car dealer who is licensed pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 415 and conducts business under the assumed name of Ace Used Cars in the Town of Appleton. The charges arose out of the sale of a used 1979 Buick Riviera through an undisclosed agent at a location away from petitioner’s licensed facility.

Upon our review of the record, we conclude that respondent’s determination is supported by substantial evidence. We further conclude that the penalty imposed in this case (civil penalties totalling $650 and revocation of petitioner’s dealer’s license) is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness *(see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222, 233). Petitioner’s fraudulent concealment of the true nature of the sale operated to deprive the purchasers of the warranty that they were entitled to under the State’s "used car lemon law” (General Business Law § 198-b). The public has a right to be protected against deceitful practices by an auto dealer *(see, Matter of Holchuck v Passidomo,*101 AD2d 917). "The petitioner’s activity constituted a course of conduct designed to take unfair advantage of the purchasers. To properly protect the public and legitimate dealerships from this type of conduct, stern action is indicated” *(Matter of Wantagh AMC/Jeep v Passidomo,*120 AD2d 534, 535; *Matter of Goldstein Motors v Melton,*51 AD2d 384). (Article 78 Proceeding Transferred by Order of Supreme *619Court, Niagara County, Koshian, J.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Denman, Green and Lowery, JJ.
# C_2019025EN.01005601.xml

| 21.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/56

---

Action brought on 20 November 2018 — Conte v EUIPO (CANNABIS STORE AMSTERDAM)

(Case T-683/18)

(2019/C 25/73)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Santa Conte (Naples, Italy) (represented by: D. Demichelis, E. Ortaglio and G. Iorio Fiorelli, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark CANNABIS STORE AMSTERDAM in the colours black, olive green, light green and white — Application for registration No 16 176 968

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 August 2018 in Case R 2181/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs of the present action, including the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before the examiner and before the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs of the present action, including the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before the examiner and before the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 71(1), read in conjunction with Article 95(1), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 71(1), read in conjunction with Article 95(1), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Lack of assessment of a fact relevant to registration of the contested mark; |
| --- | --- |

—

Lack of assessment of a fact relevant to registration of the contested mark;

| — | Lack of impartiality and care in the assessment of the meaning of the contested mark and of the perception of that mark on the part of the relevant public; |
| --- | --- |

—

Lack of impartiality and care in the assessment of the meaning of the contested mark and of the perception of that mark on the part of the relevant public;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(f), read in conjunction with Article 7(2), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(f), read in conjunction with Article 7(2), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Misidentification of the relevant public and of the perception of the contested mark; |
| --- | --- |

—

Misidentification of the relevant public and of the perception of the contested mark;

| — | Mark not contrary to public policy. |
| --- | --- |

—

Mark not contrary to public policy.

---
02/05/2015 10:23 4252271007 

David Shayne 

FAA Office ofRegional Counsel 

1601 Lind Ave. SW 

Renton, Washington 98057 

Telephone: (425) 227-2!65 

Facsimile: ( 425) 227-1007 

ANM7 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, D.C. 

In the Matter of: 

Joseph D. Barbera 

TO: Joseph D. Barbera 

FAA Case No. 2013NM090056 

FDMSD No. FAA 2013-1083 

Judge Not Assigned 

NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY 

PAGE 02/03 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Federal Aviation Administration by and through the 

undersigned counsel will be unavailable the following dates: 

February 10, 201.5 through March 1, 2015. 

Respectfully submitted this s'h day of February 2015. 

\D'!Witl' F. Shayne 

FAA Attorney 

NOTICE OF UNA VAlUBIUTY 

J:'o.g¢ I of2 

lJAVIr.> F. SHAYNE, FAA ATToRNEY 

TEL: (425) 227.,21.65~ FA.'\: (425) 227-1007 
02/05/2015 10:23 4252271007 ANM7 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I cenify that the foregoing Notice of Unavailability has been served as designated by the 

recipient's name this date, to the following: 

Federal Aviation Administration-- Facsimile 

800 Independence Avenue SW 

Washington, D.C. 20591. 

Attn: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building~ Suite 2Wl 000 

Fax: (202) 267-1293 

Joseph D Barbera- First Class, Return Receipt Requested Mail 

14706 NE Erickson Dr. 

La Center, WA 98629-4405 

Dated this S'h day of February 2015. 

Office 

T~~~ 

ofRegional Counsel (ANM-7) 

Federal. Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Ave. SW 

Renton, WA 98057 

(425) 227-2007 

PAGE 03/03 

NOTICE OF UNA 1':41LABILITF DAVID F. SHAYNE,FMATTORNEY 

Page2of2 TJ';L·. (425) 227-2165; FAX: (425) 227-l 007 
02/05/2015 10:23 4252271007 ANM7 

FACSIMJLE MESSAGE 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

OFFICE OF REGIONAL COUNSEL 

ANM-7 

1601 LIND AVENUE S.W. 

RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057 

PAGE 01/03 

The information contained in this facsimile message is lega!ly privileged and confidential 

information and is intended only for the use of the individual named on this cover sheet, 

If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 

use, dissemination, distdbution, or copy of this facsimile is strictly prohibited, Tfyou 

have received this facsimile in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at 

425-227-2007 

DATE: 

TO: 

FAX NO.: 

PHONE NO.: 

February 5, 2015 

Docket Clerk AGC-430 

202-267-1293 

RE: Joseph D. FAA 2013-1083 

Barbera 

Notice of Unavailability 

NO. PAGES: 3 including cover 

FROM: David F. Shayne 

FAX NO.: 425-227-1007 

PHONE NO.: 425-227-2165
# C_2009069EN.01003103.xml

| 21.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/31

---

Order of the President of the Court of 4 November 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-26/08) (1)

1

(2009/C 69/63)

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

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

---

(1)  OJ C 92, 12.4.2008.

1

---
#### Bondaug v. Industrial Iron Works Corp.

18896

6/16/97

Affirmed
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4327 

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to provide that a question 

of representation affecting commerce shall exist when a petitioner establishes that fewer than 50 percent of the current bargaining unit members 

had the opportunity to vote in a certification election covering their 

bargaining unit or no certification election was conducted, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 9, 2017 

Mr. FRANCIS ROONEY of Florida (for himself, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, 

Mr. BYRNE, Mr. ROKITA, Mr. GARRETT, Mr. DUNN, Mr. NORMAN, Mr. 

PERRY, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, Mr. BUDD, Mr. YOHO, Mr. FERGUSON, 

and Mr. MEADOWS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To amend the National Labor Relations Act to provide that 

a question of representation affecting commerce shall 

exist when a petitioner establishes that fewer than 50 

percent of the current bargaining unit members had the 

opportunity to vote in a certification election covering 

their bargaining unit or no certification election was conducted, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4327 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Current Employee 

3 Representation Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. FILING AND TREATMENT OF PETITIONS FOR CER5 TIFICATION OF BARGAINING REPRESENTA6 TIVE. 

7 (a) PETITION DESCRIBED.—Section 9(c)(1) of the 

8 National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 159(c)(1)) is 

9 amended— 

10 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘or’’ at 

11 the end; 

12 (2) in subparagraph (B), by adding ‘‘or’’ at the 

13 end; and 

14 (3) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the fol15 lowing new subparagraph: 

16 ‘‘(C) by an employee or a group of employ17 ees or any individual or labor organization act18 ing in their behalf, or an employer, alleging 

19 that the labor organization that has been cer20 tified or is currently recognized by the employer 

21 as the bargaining representative is no longer a 

22 representative as defined in subsection (a), if— 

23 ‘‘(i) fewer than 50 percent of the 

24 members of the bargaining unit in question 

25 had an opportunity to vote in the certifi26 cation election that resulted in certifying 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4327 IH

1 the labor organization then recognized as 

2 the bargaining representative for such 

3 unit; or 

4 ‘‘(ii) no certification election was con5 ducted regarding such unit;’’. 

6 (b) EXISTENCE OF QUESTION OF REPRESENTA7 TION.—Section 9(c)(2) of the National Labor Relations 

8 Act (29 U.S.C. 159(c)(2)) is amended by adding at the 

9 end the following: ‘‘When a petition is filed under para10 graph (1)(C), a question of representation affecting com11 merce exists if the petitioner establishes the existence of 

12 the circumstances described in paragraph (1)(C)(i) or 

13 paragraph (1)(C)(ii).’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 64576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25894]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 10:30 a.m. EST, Monday, November 3, 2014.

PLACE: CFTC Headquarters Conference Center, Three Lafayette Centre, 
1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC.

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Commission will hold this meeting to 
consider rulemaking and related matters, including the issuance of 
proposed rules and a final interpretation. The agenda for this meeting 
is available to the public and posted on the Commission's Web site at 
http://www.cftc.gov. In the event that the time, date, or place of this 
meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new 
time, date, or place of the meeting, will be posted on the Commission's 
Web site.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, 
Secretary of the Commission, 202-418-5964.

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-25894 Filed 10-28-14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
July 6 , 2015

Mr Greg lwinski

Eagle Eye Drone Service

2008 South Shore Drive

Moline, IL 61265

Dear Mr Iwinski :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your April 8 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 0 902 ), but

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does no t comply

with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further,

you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, h ow it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would no t adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

 Any additional i nformation, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any ques tions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst , Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                  JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                           1
<CASH>                            1,512,933
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  1,564,366
<PP&E>                              559,173
<DEPRECIATION>                     (245,920)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    4,057,916
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               324,977
<BONDS>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             4,511,767
<PREFERRED>                       3,029,018
<COMMON>                         19,580,216
<OTHER-SE>                      (23,499,602)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      4,057,916
<SALES>                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          0
<CGS>                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   33,026
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  (3,984,306)
<INCOME-TAX>                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              (3,984,306)
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                     (3,984,306)
<EPS-BASIC>                         (1.87)
<EPS-DILUTED>                         (1.87)



</TABLE>
August 2019

There were 10 surveillance inspections conducted at 10 different sites for a total of 

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

when possible. Routine harvest was completed.The water temperatures continued to 

increase in response to warmer air temperatures. There were no cages confirmed 

this month. All of the 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

September 2018 40 0 20639

October 2018 40 0 20679

November 2018 40 0 20719

December 2018 45 0 20764

January 2019 40 0 20804

February 2019 50 0 20854

March 2019 115 0 20969

April 2019 108 0 21077

May 2019 92 0 21169

June 2019 123 0 21292

July 2019 123 0 21415

August 2019 96 0 21511