alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020054EN.01001201.xml

| 17.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 54/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 54/12

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 12 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam — Netherlands) — Execution of a European arrest warrant issued against XD

(Case C-625/19 PPU) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Urgent preliminary ruling procedure - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - European arrest warrant - Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA - Article 6(1) - Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ - Criteria - European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State for the purpose of criminal proceedings)

(2020/C 54/15)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank Amsterdam

Party to the main proceedings

XD

Operative part of the judgment

Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that the requirements inherent in effective judicial protection from which a person in respect of whom a European arrest warrant is issued for the purpose of criminal proceedings must benefit are fulfilled if, according to the law of the issuing Member State, the conditions for issuing such a warrant, and in particular its proportionality, are subject to judicial review in that Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 382, 11.11.2019.

---
#### State v. Kalipi

17095

4/06/95

Affirmed
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1477-16T4

JENNIFER WALSH,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

UNIFIED PLANNING AND ZONING

BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE

BOROUGH OF SEA BRIGHT and

TYLER NINE, LLC,

Defendants-Respondents.

_________________________________

Submitted September 17, 2018 - Decided

Before Judges Haas and Mitterhoff.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law 

Division, Monmouth County, Docket No. L-0325-16.

Gasiorowski and Holobinko, attorneys for appellant 

(Alexis L. Gasiorowski, on the brief).

Michael A. Irene, Jr., attorney for respondent Unified 

Planning and Zoning Board of Adjustment of the 

Borough of Sea Bright.

PER CURIAM

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the 

internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.

February 15, 2019
2

A-1477-16T4

We have been advised prior to argument that this matter has been amicably 

adjusted and the parties have stipulated to the dismissal of this appeal. 

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
# C_2012025EN.01004701.xml

| 28.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/47

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2011 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission

(Case T-39/08) (1)

(Public service contracts - Tendering procedure - Provision of information technology services relating to the hosting, management, enhancement, promotion and maintenance of an internet portal - Rejection of a tender and award of the contract to another tenderer - Selection criteria - Award criteria - Non-contractual liability)

(2012/C 25/88)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. Manhaeve and N. Bambara, Agents, assisted by J. Stuyck, lawyer)

Re:

First, application for annulment of the Commission Decision of 12 November 2007 rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant in open call for tenders EAC/04/07 relating to the hosting, management, improvement, promotion and maintenance of the Commission’s internet portal for ‘e-learning’ (elearningeuropa.info) (OJ 2007 S 87), and awarding the contract to another tenderer, and, second, application for damages.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the Commission Decision of 12 November 2007 rejecting the tender submitted by the Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE in open call for tenders EAC/04/07 relating to the hosting, management, enhancement, promotion and maintenance of the European Commission’s internet portal on eLearning (elearningeuropa.info), and awarding the contract to another tenderer; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the Commission Decision of 12 November 2007 rejecting the tender submitted by the Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE in open call for tenders EAC/04/07 relating to the hosting, management, enhancement, promotion and maintenance of the European Commission’s internet portal on eLearning (elearningeuropa.info), and awarding the contract to another tenderer;

| 2. | Dismisses the application for damages; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the application for damages;

| 3. | Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis.

---

(1)  OJ C 92, 12.4.2008.

---
# C_2008183EN.01001602.xml

| 19.7.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 183/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/16

---

Action brought on 30 May 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Ireland

(Case C-234/08)

(2008/C 183/32)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: H. Støvlbæk, Agent)

Applicant:

Defendant: Ireland

Defendant:

The applicants claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2006/100/EC (1), of 20 November 2006 adapting certain Directives in the field of freedom of movement of persons, by reason of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, or in any event by failing to communicate them to the Commission, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Directive, |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2006/100/EC (1), of 20 November 2006 adapting certain Directives in the field of freedom of movement of persons, by reason of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, or in any event by failing to communicate them to the Commission, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Directive,

1

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

—

order Ireland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period within which the directive had to be transposed expired on 1 January 2007.

---

(1)  OJ L 363, p. 141.

1

---
<page>

EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANICAL OFFICER
                                   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 Voyager Petroleum, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Cathy
A. Persin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. section 1350 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 19, 2008                          By:  /s/ Cathy A. Persin
                                                   --------------------------
                                                   Cathy A. Persin
                                                   Principal Financial Officer
#### Joseph Anderson et al., Doing Business as Dunrite Pharmacy, Plaintiffs, *v.*Sonbac Sales Corporation, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Kings County,

February 10, 1959.

*Bernard Weitzman*for plaintiffs.

*David Kashman*for defendant.

Louis L. Friedman, J.

In an action to enjoin the defendant from Adulating a fair-trade agreement with respect to the prices of certain drug commodities, plaintiffs move before this court for a temporary injunction, restraining and enjoining the defendant from selling or offering to sell any of the products at a price below those established in said contracts. The relief in the action is sought under the provisions of section 369-a of the General Business Law. The moving papers assert that defendant has consistently sold various items of merchandise, described in said papers, at prices substantially below those *474set forth in the fair-trade agreements. Affidavits substantiating these claims are made part of the moving papers. The answering affidavits deny the claimed sales at so-called bargain prices and allege affirmatively that the plaintiffs herein may not be heard to complain since plaintiffs’ pharmacy itself sells the said merchandise below the so-called fair-trade prices. An affidavit to that effect indicating such a purchase from plaintiffs ’ pharmacy and from others is part of the answering affidavits. Confronted with these conflicting affidavits, the court may not say that plaintiffs are entitled at this time to the drastic relief of a restraining order. To grant such relief at this time would give to the plaintiffs, prior to the trial, all of the relief to which it would be entitled if it were successful upon trial, and our courts have consistently held that such may not be done. In *Weinberg*v. *Bennett*(281 App. Div. 1043) the Appellate Division in this department affirmed an order which denied plaintiff’s motion for a temporary injunction under section 369-a of the General Business Law. There seems to be nothing in the papers before the court which indicates that these plaintiffs are entitled to any different disposition.

Accordingly, the motion is in all respects denied.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**Certificationof Annual Report**

 

I, John F. Clifford, Chairman, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer ofProCyte Corporation, (the “Company”), hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

(1)           the Annual Report onForm 10-K for the Company for the fiscal year period ended December 31, 2003(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (12 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

(2)           the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated:  March 30, 2004 |                                 |
|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------|
|                        |                                 |
|                        |                                 |
|                        | /s/ John F. Clifford                 |   |
|                        | John F. Clifford                     |
|                        | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 6- 22 54

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Pet er Ri ckm

y er ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v. ABM Se cu rit y

Serv ic es , Inc ., als o kno wn as Am eri can Bu il di ng Mai nt en an ce

In du st rie s, In c. ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ctof M in ne so ta- Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: Sep te m

be r 8, 2 01 6 Fi le d: Sep te m

be r 13 , 20 16 [Unpubl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, ARNOLD, andGRUENDER, Circu itJu dg es .

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.Pet er Ri ckm y er ap pe al s fo ll owi ng th e di st ric t co urt’s or de r de nyin g hi m le av e 1 to pr oc eed in fo rm a paup eri s an d di sm is si ng hi s Am eri can s w i t h D is ab il it ie s Act co m pl ai nt wit ho ut pr ejud ic e un de r 28 U.S.C. § 19 15 (e)( 2) (B). W e fin d no ba si s fo r rev ers al , an d Mr. Ri ckm y er of fers no ne . The jud gm en t of th e di st ric t co ur t is affi rm ed . See 8 th Cir . R. 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le Jo hn R. Tun he im , Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St ate s D istric t Co ur t fo r 1 th e Dis tri ct of Mi nn es ot a, ad op ti ng th e rep or t an d reco m m en da ti on s of th e Hon or ab le Fran kl in L. Noel , Uni te d S ta te s M ag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ctof M in ne so ta
. -2

-
EXHIBIT
      32.2





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
      THE
      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I,
      Brad
      E. Herr, Chief Financial Officer of Command Center, Inc. (the "Company") do
      hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
      knowledge:





This
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended
      June
      29, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "report"),
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934; and





The
      information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: August 13, 2007/s/ Brad
                E.
                HerrBrad
                E. HerrChief Financial Officer
  10-QSB
            Page 27
# C_2019065EN.01004401.xml

| 18.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/44

---

Action brought on 18 December 2018 — Japan Tobacco v EUIPO — I.J. Tobacco Industry (I.J. TOBACCO INDUSTRY)

(Case T-743/18)

(2019/C 65/57)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Japan Tobacco, Inc. (Tokyo, Japon) (represented by: J. Gracia Albero, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: I.J. Tobacco Industry FZE (Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab Emirates)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European figurative mark in black and white I.J. TOBACCO INDUSTRY — Application for registration No 16 003 551

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 October 2018 in Case R 979/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to bear the costs of the present proceedings, including the costs deriving from the proceedings before the Opposition Division and the Fourth Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to bear the costs of the present proceedings, including the costs deriving from the proceedings before the Opposition Division and the Fourth Board of Appeal.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4507 

To require assurances that certain family planning service projects and programs will provide pamphlets containing the contact information of adoption centers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 30, 2017 

Mr. WITTMAN (for himself, Mr. WEBER of Texas, Mr. HARRIS, Mr. JODY B. 

HICE of Georgia, Mr. MASSIE, Mr. PEARCE, Mrs. HARTZLER, Mr. 

ROUZER, and Mr. FRANKS of Arizona) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To require assurances that certain family planning service 

projects and programs will provide pamphlets containing 

the contact information of adoption centers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be referred to as the ‘‘Adoption Infor5 mation Act’’. 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4507 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROVISION IN FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES OF 

2 PAMPHLETS CONTAINING ADOPTION CENTER 

3 CONTACT INFORMATION. 

4 Title X of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 

5 300 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing: 

7 ‘‘ADOPTION CENTER CONTACT INFORMATION

8 ‘‘SEC. 1009. (a) A grant may be made or contract 

9 entered into under section 1001 for a family planning 

10 service project or program only upon assurances satisfac11 tory to the Secretary that the project or program will— 

12 ‘‘(1) provide to each person to whom the project 

13 or program provides family planning services, at the 

14 time the person inquires about the services, a pam15 phlet that contains— 

16 ‘‘(A) a comprehensive list of the adoption 

17 centers located in the State where the services 

18 are provided; and 

19 ‘‘(B) the address and telephone number of 

20 each such center; 

21 ‘‘(2) at the same time, orally inform each such 

22 person that the pamphlet— 

23 ‘‘(A) was provided by the Department of 

24 Health and Human Services; and 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4507 IH

1 ‘‘(B) contains a comprehensive list of the 

2 adoption centers located in the State where the 

3 services are provided; and 

4 ‘‘(3) provide each such person an opportunity to 

5 read the pamphlet. 

6 ‘‘(b) The Secretary shall prepare, annually update, 

7 and distribute to each project or program referred to in 

8 subsection (a) pamphlets described in that subsection. 

9 ‘‘(c) No funds may be used to carry out this section, 

10 except funds that are appropriated to carry out this title.’’. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
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

         In connection with the Quarterly Report, of Medical Connections
Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB, for the period ended June 30,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, on the date hereof
(the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates
indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
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
               operation of the Company.

          3.   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.




Date:  August 14, 2007

                                                    By: /s/ JOSEPH AZZATA
                                                        ------------------------
                                                        JOSEPH AZZATA
                                                        Chief Executive Officer
# C_2009019EN.01000901.xml

| 24.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 4 December 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Czech Republic

(Case C-41/08) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directives 86/378/EEC and 96/97/EC - Equal treatment for men and women - Incomplete transposition)

(2009/C 19/14)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. van Beek and P. Ondrůšek, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to transpose Council Directive 86/378/EEC of 24 July 1986 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in occupational social security schemes (OJ 1986 L 225, p. 40) and Council Directive 96/97/EC of 20 December 1996 amending Directive 86/378/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in occupational social security schemes (OJ 1997 L 46, p. 20)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 86/378/EEC of 24 July 1986 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in occupational social security schemes and Council Directive 96/97/EC of 20 December 1996 amending Directive 86/378, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives and Article 54 of the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union is founded; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 86/378/EEC of 24 July 1986 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in occupational social security schemes and Council Directive 96/97/EC of 20 December 1996 amending Directive 86/378, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under those directives and Article 54 of the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the European Union is founded;

| 2. | Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 92, 12.4.2008.

1

---