alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009282EN.01004702.xml

| 21.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/47

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 5 October 2009 — Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen v Commission

(Case T-2/08) (1)

1

(Actions for annulment - State aid - Not individually concerned - Inadmissibility)

2009/C 282/90

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: A. Rosenfeld and G.-B. Lehr, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: K. Gross and B. Martenczuk, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and J. Möller, Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2008/708/EC of 23 October 2007 on the State aid C 34/06 (ex N 29/05, ex CP 13/04) which the Federal Republic of Germany is planning to implement for the introduction of digital terrestrial television (DVB-T) in North Rhine-Westphalia (OJ 2008 L 236, p. 10).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible;

| 2. | The Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission of the European Communities; |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission of the European Communities;

| 3. | The Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Federal Republic of Germany is ordered to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 64, 8.3.2008.

1

---
# C_2009312EN.01000702.xml

| 19.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 312/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 312/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 29 October 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland

(Case C-246/08) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Sixth VAT Directive - Article 2(1) and Article 4(1) and (2) - Meaning of ‘economic activities’ - Public legal aid offices - Legal aid services provided in legal proceedings in return for a part contribution paid by the recipient - Meaning of ‘direct link’ between the service rendered and the consideration received)

2009/C 312/10

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: P. Aalto and D. Triantafyllou, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Finland (represented by: A. Guimaraes-Purokoski, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 2(1) and 4(1), (2) and (5) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — National legislation providing for different treatment for VAT purposes of legal advice services depending on whether they are provided by private legal advisers or by advisers working in public legal aid offices — Distortions of competition

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 209, 15.08.2008.

1

---
# C_2009019EN.01001301.xml

| 24.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Helsingin käräjäoikeus (Finland) lodged on 4 November 2008 — Sanna Maria Parviainen v Finnair Oyj

(Case C-471/08)

(2009/C 19/22)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Helsingin käräjäoikeus

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Sanna Maria Parviainen

Applicant:

Defendant: Finnair Oyj

Defendant:

Question referred

Is Article 11(1) of the Protection of Pregnant Workers Directive (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a worker who is transferred to other lower-paid work because of her pregnancy must, on the basis of that provision, be paid as much as she received on average before the transfer, and is it relevant in that respect what kind of allowances and on what basis the worker was paid in addition to her basic monthly pay?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC) OJ L 348, 1992, p. 1.

1

---
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-50277 Conference Calendar

__________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus WILLIAM P. ORRELL, II, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. P-93-CR-31; P-94-CA-30

- - - - - - - - - - (October 18, 1995) Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * William P. Orrell, II, pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, and was sentenced to 24 months imprisonment, three years supervised release, a $2,500 fine, and a $50 special assessment. He filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 alleging, inter alia , that that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. The district court denied relief and dismissed the motion. Orrell admitted his guilt at the guilty plea hearing and at the sentencing hearing. In exchange for his guilty plea to the one-count information, the Government dismissed a six-countNo. 95-50277 -2- indictment. Orrell has not demonstrated that in the absence of his attorney's alleged errors, he would have insisted on going to trial. See United States v. Smith , 844 F.2d 203, 209 (5th Cir. 1988); Czere v. Butler , 833 F.2d 59, 64 (5th Cir. 1987). Orrell also argues that his attorney was ineffective because he took $500 from his parents prior to Barclay being appointed as his attorney. Even assuming Orrell's allegations are true, he cannot demonstrate how this action rendered his attorney's assistance ineffective. For the first time on appeal Orrell argues that his attorney was ineffective for failing to investigate the case adequately. This court need not address issues not considered by the district court. "[I]ssues raised for the first time on appeal are not reviewable by this court unless they involve purely legal questions and failure to consider them would result in manifest injustice." Varnado v. Lynaugh , 920 F.2d 320, 321 (5th Cir. 1991). This appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Because the appeal is frivolous, it will be dismissed. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Orrell that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Orrell is further cautioned to review all pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous because they have been previously decided by this
court. Appeal DISMISSED.
#### State v. Sawyer.

18516

12/24/96

Affirmed
#### JOSEPH GRASSGREEN, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, v. RIDGELEY SPORTSWEAR MANUFACTURING COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

See same case below: 2 N. J. Super. 62; 64 A. 2nd 616.

*Mr. Francis M. Seaman*for the petitioner.

*Messrs. Toner, Speakman & Crawley*for the defendant.

May 26, 1949.

Denied.
# C_2008064EN.01004303.xml

| 8.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/43

---

Action brought on 17 December 2007 — SIMSA v Commission

(Case T-480/07)

(2008/C 64/71)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Società imballaggi metallici Salerno Srl SIMSA (Salerno, Italy) (represented by: A. Calabrese, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul Decision SG/E/3/MIB/mbp D(2007) 8992 of the Commission of 17 October 2007; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Decision SG/E/3/MIB/mbp D(2007) 8992 of the Commission of 17 October 2007;

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

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas and main arguments are similar to those relied on in Case T-417/07 Lodato Gennaro & Co.

Lodato Gennaro & Co

---
# C_2008223EN.01004701.xml

| 30.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/47

---

Action brought on 13 June 2008 — Mineralbrunnen Rhön-Sprudel Egon Schindel v OHIM — Schwarzbräu (ALASKA)

(Case T-225/08)

(2008/C 223/82)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Mineralbrunnen Rhön-Sprudel Egon Schindel GmbH (Ebersburg, Germany) (represented by: P. Wadenbach, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Schwarzbräu GmbH (Zusmarshausen, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 8 April 2008 (Case R 877/2004-4); |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 8 April 2008 (Case R 877/2004-4);

| — | Completely delete the Community trade mark No 505 552 ‘ALASKA’ owing to the existence of absolute grounds for refusal; |
| --- | --- |

—

Completely delete the Community trade mark No 505 552 ‘ALASKA’ owing to the existence of absolute grounds for refusal;

| — | Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings;

| — | In the alternative to the second application, declare Community trade mark No 505 552 ‘ALASKA’ invalid at least in respect of the following goods: ‘Mineral waters and carbonated waters and other non-alcoholic drinks in Class 32’. |
| --- | --- |

—

In the alternative to the second application, declare Community trade mark No 505 552 ‘ALASKA’ invalid at least in respect of the following goods: ‘Mineral waters and carbonated waters and other non-alcoholic drinks in Class 32’.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: the figurative mark ‘ALASKA’ for goods in Class 32 (Community trade mark No 505 552)

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought:

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Schwarzbräu GmbH

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: Mineralbrunnen Rhön-Sprudel Egon Schindel GmbH

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Rejection of the application for the declaration of invalidity of the trade mark concerned.

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissal of the applicant's appeal.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (g) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1).

Pleas in law:

1

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1).

1

---
Exhibit
13.4





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







I,
Ricardo Ramos, Chief Financial Officer of Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A. (“SQM”), a corporation incorporated
under the laws of the Republic of Chile, 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:



| | 1. | The
                                                                Amended Annual Report of SQM on Form 20-F/A for the fiscal year
                                                                ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
                                                                Commission, 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 such Amended Annual Report on Form 20-F/A
                                                                fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
                                                                and results of operations of SQM.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









|       | /s/ Ricardo
    Ramos R.                                                   | 
|------ | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|Name:  | Ricardo Ramos R.                                                           | 
|Title: | Chief Financial Officer and Business Development Senior
    Vice President
|Date:  | October 30, 2013                                                           |
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of Advanced Cell Technology, Inc.(the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, JamesG. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| Dated: March 29, 2006 |   |   | /s/ James G. Stewart    |
|-----------------------|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|                  |   |   | James G. Stewart        |
|                  |   |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

1

----
99.2



                            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 Murdock Communications Corporation (the
"Company")  on  Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Wayne
Wright,  Principal  Accounting  Officer  of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 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  result  of operations of the Company.

                                                      /s/  Wayne Wright
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Wayne  Wright
                                                  Principal Accounting Officer
                                                  (Principal Financial Officer)
                                                  April 15,  2003

This  Certification  is  made  solely  for  purposes  of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
subject  to  the  knowledge  standard  contained  therein, and not for any other
purpose.

A  signed  original  of  this  written  statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act 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.  This written statement shall not be deemed to be "filed" as part
of  the  annual  report  on  Form  10-K  that  it  accompanies.
# C_2013164EN.01001401.xml

| 8.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 164/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 164/14

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 April 2013 — Evropaïki Dynamiki v Commission

(Case T-32/08) (1)

1

(Public service contracts - Tender procedure - Market analysis in view of developing a new approach for a website - Rejection of a tenderer’s bid - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Selection criteria and award criteria - Non-contractual liability)

2013/C 164/24

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (Athens, Greece) (represented initially by N. Korogiannakis, and subsequently by M. Roli and M. Stavropoulous, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: E. Manhaeve, acting as Agent, assisted by J. Stuyck and A.-M. Vandromme, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application, first, for annulment of the decision of the Commission rejecting the tender submitted by the applicant in connection with the call for tenders for a market analysis in view of developing a new approach for the ‘Environment for Young Europeans’ website and, secondly, for compensation

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

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

---

(1)  OJ C 92, 12.4.2008.

1

---
#### Linda P. Goldfarb, Respondent-Appellant, v Stephen Goldfarb, Appellant-Respondent.

— Motion for clarification of this Court’s decision and order (173 AD2d 355) entered on
<PAGE>   1


                          CAPSTAR COMMUNICATIONS, INC.

                                  SUBSIDIARIES



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
              ENTITY                                                  JURISDICTION
              ------                                                  ------------
<S>                                                                     <C>
Capstar Communications California, Inc.                                 Delaware

Capstar Radio Operating Company                                         Delaware

Capstar TX Limited Partnership                                          Delaware

Liberty Broadcasting of Albany Incorporated                             New York

Liberty Broadcasting of New York, Inc.                                  New York

Parker Broadcasting Company                                             California

WBAB, Inc.                                                              New York

WBLI, Inc.                                                              New York

WGBB, Inc.                                                              New York

WGNA, Inc.                                                              New York

WGNA-FM, Inc.                                                           New York

WHFM, Inc.                                                              New York

WHJJ, Inc.                                                              Rhode Island

WHJY, Inc.                                                              Rhode Island

WPYX, Inc.                                                              New York

WSNE, Inc.                                                              Rhode Island

WTRY, Inc.                                                              New York
</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the quarterly report of SIN Holdings, Inc. (the
Company), on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2004, (the
Report), I, Steve S. Sinohui, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, based on my knowledge, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

|1) |  | the
Report fully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act  of 1934; and
|-- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|2) |  | the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material  respects, the
Companys financial position and results of operations.
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Steve S. Sinohui
Steve S. Sinohui, Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 4, 2004

---