alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008037EN.01002602.xml

| 9.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/26

---

Action brought on 4 December 2007 — Coats Holdings v Commission

(Case T-439/07)

(2008/C 37/42)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Coats Holdings Ltd (represented by: W. Sibree and C. Jeffs, Solicitors)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul Articles 1(4) and 2(4) of the decision insofar as they relate to Coats; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Articles 1(4) and 2(4) of the decision insofar as they relate to Coats;

| — | in the alternative, annul or reduce the fine imposed on Coats by Article 2(4) of the decision; and |
| --- | --- |

—

in the alternative, annul or reduce the fine imposed on Coats by Article 2(4) of the decision; and

| — | order the Commission to bear its own costs and those incurred by Coats. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to bear its own costs and those incurred by Coats.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Decision C(2007) 4257 final of 19 September 2007 in Case COMP/E-1/39.168 — PO/Hard Haberdashery: Fasteners, by which the Commission found that the applicant, together with other undertakings, had infringed Article 81 EC by among others exchanging price information, fixing minimum prices and sharing markets.

In support of its application, the applicant submits that the Commission's assessment of the evidence as a whole is vitiated by manifest errors of assessment. According to the applicant the Commission failed to prove to the requisite standard that the applicant was a party to a bilateral market-sharing agreement with Prym between January 1977 and July 1998.

In the alternative, the applicant submits that the Commission failed to prove that any infringement continued beyond 19 September 1997 or failed to prove a single continuous infringement for the period to 15 July 1998 entitling the Commission to fine the applicant for an infringement lasting 21 Formula years.

The applicant further, alternatively, claims that the Commission infringed the applicant's fundamental procedural rights under Article 6(3)(d) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms to examine or have examined witnesses against it in proceedings of a criminal nature.

Finally, the applicant alleges, in the alternative, that the Commission erred in mechanically applying a multiplier of 215 % to the basic amount of the fine for a duration of 21 Formula years, rather than exercising its discretion under the applicable fining guidelines.

---
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 244 (Thursday, December 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 88426-88427]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28049]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 88427]]

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 21, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 12, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 34 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2024-112, CP2024-117.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-28049 Filed 12-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1004 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1004

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend title 36, United States Code, to encourage the nationwide 
        observance of two minutes of silence each Veterans Day.

    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 ``Veterans Day Moment of Silence 
Act''.

SEC. 2. OBSERVANCE OF VETERANS DAY.

    (a) Two Minutes of Silence.--Chapter 1 of title 36, United States 
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``Sec. 145. Veterans Day
    ``The President shall issue each year a proclamation calling on the 
people of the United States to observe two minutes of silence on 
Veterans Day in honor of the service and sacrifice of veterans 
throughout the history of the Nation, beginning at--
            ``(1) 3:11 p.m. Atlantic standard time;
            ``(2) 2:11 p.m. eastern standard time;
            ``(3) 1:11 p.m. central standard time;
            ``(4) 12:11 p.m. mountain standard time;
            ``(5) 11:11 a.m. Pacific standard time;
            ``(6) 10:11 a.m. Alaska standard time; and
            ``(7) 9:11 a.m. Hawaii-Aleutian standard time.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 1 of 
title 36, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
following new item:

``145. Veterans Day.''.

            Passed the Senate November 9, 2015.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
114th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1004

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To amend title 36, United States Code, to encourage the nationwide 
        observance of two minutes of silence each Veterans Day.
```
#### THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, RESPONDENT, v. LEWIS R. HOGAN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Argued January 3, 1949

Decided February 14, 1949.

*376
      *Mr. Harry Green*argued the cause for the defendant-appellant *(Mr. Philip L. Lipman,*attorney).

*Mr. Joseph B. Perskie,*Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for the respondent.

Per Curiam.

We are in accord with the opinion of Mr. Justice Burling, speaking for the former Supreme Court, with this qualification. With respect to the introduction of neutralization testimony the opinion states “The control of this examination is within the discretion of the trial court,” citing *State v. D’Adame,*84 *N. J. L.*386 *(E. & A.*1913); *State v. Kysilka,*85 *N. J. L.*712 *(E. & A.*1913) and *State v. Guida,*118 *N. J. L.*289 *(Sup. Ct. 1937),*aff’d 119 *N. J. L.*464 *(E. & A. 1937).*

While the admission and extent of neutralization testimony is discretionary with the court such discretion is not of an arbitrary or absolute character but a legal discretion. It relates to the question of whether, under the particular facts and circumstances of the case, justice requires that the evidence be admitted. As said by Lord Mansfield legal discretion means “sound discretion, guided by law,” and not by whim or humor. *LaBell v. Quasdorf,*116 *N. J. L.*368 *(Sup. Ct.*1936).

The judgment of the former Supreme Court is affirmed.

*377
      *For affirmance:*Chief Justice Vanderbilt and Justices He-her, Oliphant and Ackerson—4.

*For reversal:*Justice Wacheneeld—1.
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 13.1

                             SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                               YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS DATA:             1997           1996            1995            1994           1993
------------------------------------  -------------  -------------  --------------  --------------  -------------
<S>                                   <C>            <C>            <C>             <C>             <C>
Revenues............................  $   1,856,776  $   3,275,957  $    4,320,056  $    4,472,983  $   1,939,517
Costs and expenses..................      8,305,420     12,633,076      16,714,991      16,626,701      9,612,531
                                      -------------  -------------  --------------  --------------  -------------
Net loss............................  $  (6,448,644) $  (9,357,119) $  (12,394,935) $  (12,153,718) $  (7,673,014)
                                      -------------  -------------  --------------  --------------  -------------
                                      -------------  -------------  --------------  --------------  -------------

Net loss per common share...........  $       (0.48) $       (0.71) $        (0.95) $        (0.97) $       (0.80)

Weighted average number of common
  shares used in computing net loss
  per common share..................     13,326,929     13,210,036      13,100,818      12,593,131      9,575,218
                                      -------------  -------------  --------------  --------------  -------------
                                      -------------  -------------  --------------  --------------  -------------
</TABLE>

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                               YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
BALANCE SHEET DATA:                        1997           1996           1995           1994           1993
-------------------------------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
<S>                                    <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term
  investments........................  $  12,866,617  $  20,846,836  $  36,077,520  $  43,014,137  $  22,653,578
Working capital......................     14,482,669     20,647,423     30,438,486     41,746,596     21,170,301
Total assets.........................     21,310,959     27,963,658     45,093,558     50,013,086     26,265,524
Total liabilities....................        694,462      1,124,881      9,209,004      1,863,311      1,797,292
Accumulated deficit..................    (62,318,983)   (55,870,339)     (46513220    (34,118,285)   (21,964,567)
Stockholders' equity.................     20,616,497     26,838,777     35,884,554     48,149,775     24,468,232
</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

    CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Insurance Auto
Auctions, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 29, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Thomas C. O'Brien, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, 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.

Date: August 12, 2003

                                  /s/ Thomas C. O'Brien
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Thomas C. O'Brien, Chief Executive Officer

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Insurance Auto
Auctions, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 29, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Scott P. Pettit, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
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.

Date: August 12, 2003

                                  /s/ Scott P. Pettit
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  Scott P. Pettit, Chief Financial Officer

         This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EX-10.2



 EXHIBIT 10.2 

DELCATH SYSTEMS, INC. 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO 

WARRANTS TO PURCHASE COMMON STOCK 

Warrant Nos.: D-1-101 (with respect to changes 1. (b) and
(d) only), D-1-201, D-1-202, D-1-203, D-1-204, D-1-205, D-1-206, D-1-207,
D-1-208, D-1-209,
D-1-210, D-1-211,
D-1-212, D-1-213 

Issuance Date: June 4, 2018 

Date of Amendment: July 20, 2018 (“Amendment Date”) 

1. AMENDMENT OF WARRANTS. Each Warrant to Purchase Common Stock, Warrant Nos.:
D-1-101 (with respect to changes 1. (b) and (d) only), D-1-201, D-1-202, D-1-203,
D-1-204, D-1-205,
D-1-206, D-1-207,
D-1-208, D-1-209,
D-1-210, D-1-211,
D-1-212, and D-1-213 issued by Delcath Systems, Inc. on June 4, 2018 is hereby
amended as follows: 
 (a) the Exercise Date is the Amendment Date; 

(b) in Section 4(b)(i), the word “shall” is changed to “has” and the word “purchase” is changed to
“purchased”; 
 (c) in Section 17, the words “or after” are added after the words “this Warrant on,” the
words “on or prior to the Exercise Date” are deleted in each place in such section that they currently appear, the words “Event of Default has occurred as of the Exercise Date” are deleted, and the word “are” is added
before the words “then held by Holder”; and 
 (d) in Section 18(p), the words “any of the following, only to occur upon
approval of the Company’s Board of Directors,” are added in the first line between the words “mean” and “(A)”. 

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

SIGNATURE PAGES FOLLOW] 

  
 1 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this First Amendment to Warrants to Purchase
Common Stock to be duly executed as of the Amendment Date set out above. 
  

							
		 		 	DELCATH SYSTEMS, INC.
				
		 		 	By:	 	 
		 		 	Name:	 	Jennifer K. Simpson
		 		 	Title:	 	President and Chief Executive Officer

 [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

SIGNATURE PAGE FOR HOLDER FOLLOWS] 

  
 2 








 [HOLDER SIGNATURE PAGES TO DELCATH SYSTEMS, INC. FIRST AMENDMENT TO WARRANTS TO PURCHASE COMMON
STOCK] 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have caused this First Amendment to Warrants to Purchase Common Stock to be duly executed
by their respective authorized signatories as of the date first indicated above. 
  

			
	Name of Purchaser:	 	 


					
			
	Signature of Authorized Signatory of Purchaser:	  	 	  	
	Name of Authorized Signatory:	  	 	  	
	Title of Authorized Signatory:	  	 	  	


  
 3
# C_2008171EN.01001401.xml

| 5.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/14

---

Action brought on 8 April 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland

(Case C-144/08)

(2008/C 171/24)

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: I. Koskinen and D. Triantafyllou)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Finland

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by using an incomplete definition of normal residence in order to determine whether the temporary import of certain forms of transport is subject to tax exemptions, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(1) of Council Directive No 83/182/EEC (1) of 28 March 1983 on tax exemptions within the Community for certain means of transport temporarily imported into one Member State from another; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by using an incomplete definition of normal residence in order to determine whether the temporary import of certain forms of transport is subject to tax exemptions, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7(1) of Council Directive No 83/182/EEC (1) of 28 March 1983 on tax exemptions within the Community for certain means of transport temporarily imported into one Member State from another;

1

| — | order Republic of Finland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

For the purpose of determining tax exemptions, Article 7(1) of Directive 83/182/EEC governs normal residence, which determines the Member State under whose rules on temporary imports the vehicle in question falls, and the Member State which is entitled to charge tax on that vehicle. Article 7(1) of Directive 83/182/EEC governs certain exceptions to the rule according to which normal residence means the place where a person usually lives for at least 185 days in each calendar year. In particular, the second subparagraph of Article 7(1) states that if the normal residence of a person whose occupational ties are in a different place from his personal ties and who consequently lives in turn in different places situated in two or more Member States shall be regarded as being the place of his personal ties, provided that such person returns there regularly. However, it is expressly stated that the last condition need not be met where the person is living in a Member State in order to carry out a task of a definite duration.

However, Finnish legislation imposes a requirement for the person concerned to return to the place of normal residence also in the case where he is living in Finland in order to carry out a task of a definite duration. Therefore, Finland has failed to correctly transpose Article 7(1) of Directive 83/182/EEC into national law.

---

(1)  OJ 1998 L 105, p. 59.

1

---
# C_2019065EN.01004702.xml

| 18.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/47

---

Order of the General Court of 14 December 2018 — Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO — Shimano Europe (PRO)

(Case T-122/18) (1)

(2019/C 65/62)

Language of the case: English

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

---

(1)  OJ C 142, 23.4.2018.

---
# C_2020414EN.01002702.xml

| 30.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 414/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 414/27

---

Order of the President of the First Chamber of the Court of 25 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) — United Kingdom) — MG v HH

(Case C-946/19) (1)

(2020/C 414/44)

Language of the case: English

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

---

(1)  OJ C 68, 2.3.2020.

---
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Gary M. De Laurentiis, Chief Executive Officer of Itec Environmental Group Inc. certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Itec Environmental Group Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;



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



4. The small business issuers other certifying officer 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 small business issuer and 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 small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;



b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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 small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and



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



a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are likely to adversely affect the small business issuer'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 small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and





/s/ Gary M. De Laurentiis

-------------------------

Gary M. De Laurentiis

Date: April 14, 2004