alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2012025EN.01005102.xml

| 28.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/51

---

Order of the General Court of 15 November 2011 — Becker Flugfunkwerk v OHIM — Harman Becker Automotive Systems (BECKER AVIONIC SYSTEMS)

(Case T-263/08) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2012/C 25/99)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Becker Flugfunkwerk GmbH (Rheinmünster, Germany) (represented by: O. Griebenow, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Harman Becker Automotive Systems GmbH (Karlsbad, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 April 2008 (Case R 398/2007 1) relating to opposition proceedings between Harman Becker Automotive Systems GmbH and Becker Flugfunkwerk GmbH.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The applicant shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the defendant. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the defendant.

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 30.8.2008.

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 113 (Thursday, July 26, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5327]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. SMITH of Texas:
       H.R. 6215.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       clause 8 of section 8 of Article I of the Constitution.
```
#### Philip H. Oswald, Inc., Plaintiff, *v.*Adele T. Oswald, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, *Nassau County,*

October *6, 1959.*

*165
      *Milton Lipson*for plaintiff.

*Frank & E. George Lawkins*for defendant.

Mario Pittoni, J.

The notice of motion seeks an order pursuant to section 964 of the Penal Law forever restraining the defendant Adele T. Oswald from using the name Harry Oswald or Oswald in her business. The supporting affidavit merely seeks a temporary injunction. The latter request shall be deemed the one intended.

Plaintiff corporation, Philip H. Oswald, Inc., is presently controlled by George J. Oswald (the son of Philip H. Oswald who is now deceased) and Elizabeth J. Oswald, the wife of George J. Oswald. This corporation was formed in 1956 to carry on a business begun by the elder Oswald in 1914.

From about 1939, Harry Oswald, a son of Philip A. Oswald, carried on a competing business under the assumed name, North Shore Cess Pool Cleaning Co. Prior to 1939, and for many years previously he had helped his father conduct his business. Harry Oswald died in 1958. After his death the defendant, his widow, carried on such business under the same name. In the current telephone directory there appears a listing *“*Harry Oswald — Cesspool Cleaning”. Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the use of this listing as well as the use of the name Oswald as above stated. Defendant says her son, Harry P. Oswald, is now associated in business with her.

There are many allegations and counter allegations made by the two affiants, Elizabeth J. Oswald, for the plaintiff, and Adele T. Oswald, the defendant, which cannot be resolved on affidavits. It is interesting to notice that both affiants are Oswalds only by marriage.

The plaintiff has not demonstrated for the purpose of a temporary injunction irreparable injury pending trial.

Under all the circumstances presented by the record at this point, it is impossible to say there is any strong probability of plaintiff’s success in the action, and the motion for a temporary injunction is accordingly denied.

This case should be noticed for trial and put on the November Special Term, Part II, Trial Calendar for trial in November, 1959, subject to the approval of the Justice then presiding.

Submit order.
# C_2010346EN.01003701.xml

| 18.12.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 346/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 346/37

---

Order of the President of the Court of 8 October 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Ried im Innkreis (Austria)) — Criminal proceedings against Roland Langer

(Case C-235/08) (1)

1

()

2010/C 346/64

Language of the case: German

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

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 30.8.2008.

1

---
# C_2010063EN.01000901.xml

| 13.3.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 January 2010 — European Commission v Czech Republic

(Case C-343/08) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2003/41/EC - Activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision - Partial failure to transpose within the prescribed time-limit - No institutions for occupational retirement provision located in the national territory - Competence of Member States to organise their own national retirement pension system)

2010/C 63/13

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Šimerdová and N. Yerrell, Agents)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to adopt, within the prescribed period, all the provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2003/41/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 June 2003 on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision (OJ 2003 L 235, p. 10)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Articles 8, 9, 13, 15 to 18 and 20(2) to (4) of Directive 2003/41/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 June 2003 on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 22(1) of that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Articles 8, 9, 13, 15 to 18 and 20(2) to (4) of Directive 2003/41/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 June 2003 on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision, the Czech Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 22(1) of that directive;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.

1

---
INTERNET BUSINESS'S INTERNATIONAL, INC.
                   3900 BIRCH STREET, SUITE 111
                 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92664)
                PH. 949.833.0261 FAX. 949.333.0762

February 14, 2000


Anthony Lee. President
Direct Communications, Inc.
Las Vegas, NV
(702) 433-9416
Fax. (702) 433-8659

Dear Tony.

Time is of the essence, especially for you, but if we are going
to make a deal, it is certainly going to effect us as well. So,
we need to stop fooling around and really move.

Per our conversation, the new company, Allstates Communications,
Inc. will take over $250,000.00 of your debt and Direct Communications,
Inc. which will consist of Amex of $25,000.00, Community Bank of $91,832.00
IRS of $130,123.00 and Futa Tax $17,582.00. The balance of the
$410,000.00 will be paid by the new company out of profits. You
will, of course, receive 30,000 shares of 144 stock of IBI.

Your employment contract will be for 3 years, with a stating
salary of $6,500.00 per month and, after 90 days from closing,
your salary will go up to $7,000.00 per month.  Tony Lee, will be
President of the new company and will serve at the pleasure of
the board of directors.  There will) be bonuses for Tony Lee
based on performance.  The bonuses will be by way of stock
options.  The bonuses will be given to Mr. Lee by the new company
and that will be with IBI common stock and by IBI's discretion

All of the assets of the present company, will be transferred to
the new company.  Cash in the bank, inventory and all receivables with a
minimum of $100,000.00.

Sincerely


/s/  Louis Cherry
Louis Cherry
President, IBI, Inc.

I accept this offer on February 25, 2000


/s/  Clyde A. Lee
Clyde A. Lee on 2-25-00 individually and as
President of Direct Communications, Inc
# C_2009141EN.01004002.xml

| 20.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 141/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/40

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 29 April 2009 — Enercon v OHIM (E-Ship)

(Case T-81/08) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark E-Ship - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

2009/C 141/83

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Enercon GmbH (Aurich, Germany) (represented by: R. Böhm and V. Henke, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Schäffner, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 December 2007 (Case R 319/2007-1), relating to an application for registration of the sign E-ship as a Community trade mark

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders Enercon GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders Enercon GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 107, 26.4.2008.

1

---
From: Colon Miller

To: Finamore, Robert (OST)

Cc: Kruger, Brett (OST); artem@volga-dnepr.us

Subject: Emergency Transport for Ford Motor Co. / Additional Info

Date: Thursday, September 13, 2012 4:36:01 PM

Importance: High

Bob,

Concerning the nature of the emergency request; Ford POCs have stated the

production line in Mexico has halted due to an engineering problem with the

automobile dies used in the MKZ and Ford Fusion models. These dies have had to

be removed from the plant in Mexico, transported via truck to Arizona for loading onto

airlift for immediate delivery to a manufacturing facility in Michigan for retooling, and

returned ASAP to Mexico to continue production. This halt in production is causing

delays in delivery and sales, impacting Ford’s ability to get the vehicles out of the

factory and to the public. 

NON-OBJECTIONS - We have received “Non-Objections” from all the U.S. Carriers

concerning the transportation of the automotive dies in the attached request. The

Charterer Active Aero Group on behalf of Ford Motor Company also obtained nonobjection replies, as the Charterer had contacted the U.S. Carriers prior to contacting

Volga-Dnepr. This equipment is very heavy and creates a concentrated footprint

during loading, jeopardizing damaging B-747 cargo floors. Possibility of trucking

versus flying presents several problems; (1) Time line required is too slow for transit,

(2) permit request for the long transit route would be lengthy and further add to the

hardships previously stated, (3) This is of an urgent nature and cannot wait for trucks

to move material over the road due to limitations of state by state permits for oversize

loads. (4) Over size loads can only be moved during the day time hours and in some

states along the route will not allow it to move during weekends. Please advise if you

need additional information, or if this meets with your acceptance.

Best regards,

Colon

COLON MILLER

VOLGA-DNEPR UNIQUE AIR CARGO

MILITARY OPERATIONS & KEY ACCOUNT MANAGER

OFFC- 832 585-8611

CELL - 713 298-7724

E-MAIL colon@volga-dnepr.us

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.

For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

______________________________________________________________________
# C_2021182EN.01001601.xml

| 10.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/16

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 18 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Gliwicach — Poland) — A. v Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej

(Case C-895/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Indirect taxation - VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Intra-Community acquisition of goods - Deduction of input tax payable on such an acquisition - Procedural requirements - Substantive requirements - Period within which the tax declaration must be submitted - Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality)

(2021/C 182/22)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Gliwicach

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: A.

Defendant: Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej

Other party: Rzecznik Małych i Średnich Przedsiębiorców

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 167 and 178 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which makes the exercise of the right to deduct value added tax (VAT) payable on an intra-Community acquisition in the same accounting period as that in which the VAT is due subject to entry of the VAT due in the tax declaration submitted within a three-month period following the end of the month in which the tax liability arose in relation to the goods acquired.

---

(1)  OJ C 54, 17.2.2020.

---
## F I FTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5 D 2 3

- 1090 LT Case No. 2021

- CF

- 936

_____________________________
T YSON M C C ORD , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Sumter County

. Mary Hatcher , Judge

. Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender, and Ryan M. Belanger, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allison L. Morris , Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee

.

September 5, 2023

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.

S OUD , B OATWRIGHT , and M AC I VER , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________
\ "\ "V'O
 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGIONS 

9991STH STREET- SUITE 200 

DENVER, CO S0202-2466 

Phone SOO-227-S917 

http://www.epa.gov/regionOS 

Ref: 8P-AR AUG 3 0 2006 

Kirsten King 

Air Pollution Control Division 

Colorado Department of Public Health 

and Environment 

4300 Cherry Creek Dr., South 

Denver, CO 80246-1530 

RE: June 16, 2006 letter on Proposed Revisions to Regulation 1 regarding Air Curtain Incinerators 

Dear Ms. King: 

Your letter dated June 16, 2006 provided Colorado's reasoning for removing infeasible performance 

standards for air curtain incinerators (also known as air curtain destructors) from Colorado's Regulation No.1. 

The letter also provided the State's analysis of why removing the performance standards will not result in 

backsliding. 

The performance standard in question is a grain loading standard provided in Regulation No.1, 

Section III.B.2. For the first time, Air Curtain Incinerators (ACIs) will be subject to this standard because the 

State is adopting 40 CFR Part 60, Subparts CCCC and EEEE regarding incinerators. ACIs are defined as 

incinerators within these CFR Subparts..Regulation 1 requires performance testing against the grain loading 

standard for most incinerators in the State. The performance testing is infeasible for ACIs because ACls have 

no stack. Your letter reflects that the State only intends to exempt from the Regulation 1 standard, ACIs 

subject to 40 CFR Part 60. Your letter also indicates that air curtain destructors were not previously defined as 

incinerators, and thus, the Division never regulated them as incinerators under Section IILB of Regulation 1. 

Based on our preliminary analysis, we agree with your reasoning on the infeasibility of the Regulation 

1 grain loading standard for air curtain incinerators and that the proposed changes will not result in 

"backsliding." Your analysis indicates that the changes do not represent a relaxation of the existing SIP 

because previously Regulation 1 did not define, and the State did not treat, air curtain destructors as 

incinerators. We caution, however, that this is only our preliminary reaction. Any final EPA action on the 

proposed changes to Regulation 1 will only occur through rulemaking, following notice and comment. 

Should you have questions, please feel free to contact Mark Komp of my staff at 303 3126022. 

__§i~rely,

/ ,. 

~H;1"'" Richard R. Long, Jrectoy/.·/ 

Air and Radiation Progr~ / ...... ~" .. "' 

cc: Margo Griffin (Colorado APCD) 

@printed on Recycled Paper
#### In the Matter of Prestige Roofing *&*Siding Co., Inc., et al., Petitioners, v Thomas Hartnett, as Commissioner of Labor of the State of New York Respondent.

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Commissioner of Labor of the State of New York, dated July 31, 1989, which, after a hearing, *inter alia,*found that the petitioner was liable pursuant to Labor Law § 220 (3), for *920underpayments in the amount of $77,809.50, plus interest calculated at 10% per annum, incurred pursuant to Labor Law § 220 in connection with roofing work performed in 1983, and levied a civil penalty of $11,671.42, representing 15% of the total underpayments.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

The record reveals that the respondent’s investigator offered a rational explanation of how he arrived at the underpayment calculations, and that these calculations were based upon substantial evidence *(see, Anderson v Mount Clements Pottery Co.,*328 US 680, 686-687; *Brock v Seto,*790 F2d 1446, 1448-1449; *Matter of D.D.G. Gen. Contr. Corp. v Hartnett,*149 AD2d 819, 820; *Matter of Schepanski Roofing & Gutters v Roberts,*133 AD2d 757, 758). The mere fact that the underpayment calculations were at best an approximation, due to the failure of John Schepanski Roofing & Gutters, the petitioner’s subcontractor, to keep proper records pursuant to Labor Law § 220 (3-a) (a), does not call for a different conclusion *(see, Matter of D.D.G. Gen. Contr. Corp. v Hartnett, supra,*at 820; *Matter of Schepanski Roofing & Gutters v Roberts, supra,*at 758). Fiber, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5633]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will entertain up to five requests 
for 1-minute speeches on each side of the aisle.

                          ____________________
```
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
Annual Report of NB&T Financial Group, Inc. (the Company), on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010, dated the date of this Certification (the Report), I, John J. Limbert, the President and the Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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 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: March 15, 2011 |  |  |  | /S/    JOHN J.
LIMBERT               
|                     |  |  |  | John J. Limbert                      
|                     |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer



93
# C_2009044EN.01007602.xml

| 21.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/76 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/76

---

Action brought on 11 December 2008 — Nijs v Court of Auditors

(Case F-98/08)

(2009/C 44/137)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Bart Nijs (Aalst, Belgium) (represented by: F. Rollinger, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Court of Auditors of the European Communities

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

First, annulment of the decision not to promote the applicant in 2008 and, second, an order that the defendant make good the material and non-material loss suffered by the applicant.

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision not to promote the applicant in 2008, published in Staff Note No 32/2008 of 5 May 2008, and the acts preparatory to that decision, in particular the decisions of 19 and 29 February 2008 which were the subject of the Staff Notes Nos 10-2008 and 17-2008 adopting the lists of those eligible for promotion at 1 January 2008, inasmuch as they concern the applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision not to promote the applicant in 2008, published in Staff Note No 32/2008 of 5 May 2008, and the acts preparatory to that decision, in particular the decisions of 19 and 29 February 2008 which were the subject of the Staff Notes Nos 10-2008 and 17-2008 adopting the lists of those eligible for promotion at 1 January 2008, inasmuch as they concern the applicant;

| — | Declare expressly that the subsequent decisions and preparatory acts mentioned above are void; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare expressly that the subsequent decisions and preparatory acts mentioned above are void;

| — | Order the defendant to make good the material loss amounting to the loss of income which the applicant suffered in relation to the higher salary which he would have received had the period mentioned above not intervened to hindered his career, along with the non-material loss additional to the similar compensation claimed in other disputes, of EUR 10 000; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to make good the material loss amounting to the loss of income which the applicant suffered in relation to the higher salary which he would have received had the period mentioned above not intervened to hindered his career, along with the non-material loss additional to the similar compensation claimed in other disputes, of EUR 10 000;

| — | Order the Court of Auditors of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Court of Auditors of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---