alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009006EN.01003501.xml

| 10.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/35

---

Action brought on 9 October 2008 — Wilfer v OHIM

(Case T-458/08)

(2009/C 6/71)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Applicant: Hans-Peter Wilfer (Markneukirchen, Germany) (represented by A. Kockläuner, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 25 July 2008 in Case R 78/2007-4 in its entirety; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market of 25 July 2008 in Case R 78/2007-4 in its entirety;

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark representing the head of a guitar using the colours silver, grey and brown, for goods in Classes 9 and 15 (No 2 639 821)

Community trade mark concerned:

Decision of the Examiner: Rejection of the registration

Decision of the Examiner:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Rejection of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

| — | infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (1);

1

| — | infringement of the principle of examination of the facts by the Office of its own motion, including disregard for the rules concerning the burden of proof under Article 74(1) of Regulation No 40/94; |
| --- | --- |

—

infringement of the principle of examination of the facts by the Office of its own motion, including disregard for the rules concerning the burden of proof under Article 74(1) of Regulation No 40/94;

| — | infringement of the requirement to state reasons for the purposes of the first sentence of Article 73 of Regulation No 40/94; |
| --- | --- |

—

infringement of the requirement to state reasons for the purposes of the first sentence of Article 73 of Regulation No 40/94;

| — | infringement of the principle of equal treatment. |
| --- | --- |

—

infringement of the principle of equal treatment.

---

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

1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Office of Foreign Assets Control

# AGENCY:

Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is publishing the names of one or more persons that have been placed on OFAC's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (SDN List) based on OFAC's determination that one or more applicable legal criteria were satisfied. All property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of these persons are blocked, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them.

      ( print page 89813)    

# DATES:

                        See                         **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**                         section for applicable date(s).                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

OFAC: Bradley Smith, Director, tel.: 202-622-2490; Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-2420; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; or Assistant Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Electronic Availability

                    The SDN List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions programs are available on OFAC's website (                    *https://www.treasury.gov/​ofac*).                

## Notice of OFAC Actions

On December 8, 2023, OFAC determined that the property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction of the following persons are blocked under the relevant sanctions authorities listed below.
      ( print page 89814)          ( print page 89815)          ( print page 89816)    

Dated: December 8, 2023

Bradley Smith,

Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the Treasury.

[FR Doc. 2023-28591 Filed 12-27-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P
# C_2008142EN.01003903.xml

| 7.6.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/39

---

Action brought on 5 February 2008 — X v European Parliament

(Case F-14/08)

(2008/C 142/74)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: X (Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg) (represented by V. Christianos, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament

Defendant:

The subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision by which the European Parliament's Director of Personnel considered that the applicant did not suffer from permanent and total disability making it impossible for her to perform her duties, and annulment of the opinion given by the Invalidity Committee on 27 June 2007.

Form of order sought

| — | Annulment of the decision by which the European Parliament's Director of Personnel considered that the applicant did not suffer from permanent and total disability making it impossible for her to perform her duties, and annulment of the opinion given by the Invalidity Committee on 27 June 2007; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annulment of the decision by which the European Parliament's Director of Personnel considered that the applicant did not suffer from permanent and total disability making it impossible for her to perform her duties, and annulment of the opinion given by the Invalidity Committee on 27 June 2007;

| — | that the file should be sent back to the Invalidity Committee for it to take another decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

that the file should be sent back to the Invalidity Committee for it to take another decision;

| — | that the European Parliament should be ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

that the European Parliament should be ordered to pay the costs.

---
A poverty rate is the ratio of the persons below the poverty level 

to the total number of persons for whom poverty status has been 

determined. The map uses natural breaks in the distribution to 

organize the data into groups of common values. 

Map Created: August 2019

Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 

American Community Survey, 2013–2017

Poverty Rates in Appalachia, 2013–2017

(County Rates)

0 50 100

Miles

GEORGIA

ALABAMA

MISSISSIPPI

SOUTH

CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

WEST

VIRGINIA

KENTUCKY

OHIO ILLINOIS INDIANA

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

DE

NJ PENNSYLVANIA

MARYLAND

NEW YORK

TENNESSEE

28.4% - 41.0%

20.9% - 28.3%

15.6% - 20.8%

6.5% - 15.5%

Poverty Rate

(Natural Breaks Classification)

U.S. average = 14.6%

Appalachian average = 16.3%
# C_2011186EN.01001902.xml

| 25.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 186/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 186/19

---

Judgment of the General Court of 17 May 2011 — Elf Aquitaine v Commission

(Case T-299/08) (1)

1

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market in sodium chlorate - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC and Article 53 EEA - Imputability of the infringement - Rights of the defence - Obligation to state reasons - Principle that penalties must fit the offence - Principle that penalties must have a proper legal basis - Presumption of innocence - Principle of sound administration - Principle of legal certainty - Misuse of powers - Fines - Aggravating circumstance - Deterrence - Mitigating circumstance - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - Significant added value)

2011/C 186/35

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Elf Aquitaine SA (Courbevoie, France) (represented by: É. Morgan de Rivery and S. Thibault-Liger, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: X. Lewis, É. Gippini Fournier and R. Sauer, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Principally, action for annulment of Commission Decision C(2008) 2626 final of 11 June 2008 relating to a proceeding under Article 81(1) EC and Article 53(1) of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) (Case COMP/38.695 — Sodium Chlorate), in so far as that decision relates to Elf Aquitaine and, in the alternative, action for annulment or reduction of the amounts of the fines imposed on that company in that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Elf Aquitaine SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Elf Aquitaine SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4722 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4722

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 111 Market Street in Saugerties, New York, as the ``Maurice D. 
                    Hinchey Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 21, 2017

Mr. Faso (for himself and Ms. Slaughter) introduced the following bill; 
 which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 111 Market Street in Saugerties, New York, as the ``Maurice D. 
                    Hinchey Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. MAURICE D. HINCHEY POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 111 Market Street in Saugerties, New York, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Maurice D. Hinchey Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Maurice D. 
Hinchey Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
JOINT
AND MUTUAL GENERAL RELEASE


KNOWN
ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS


 


This
Joint and Mutual General Release (the “Release”) is made by and between Matthew Harrington (“Harrington”),
Robert Rosner (“Rosner”) and SocialPlay USA, Inc. (“SocialPlay”)


1.       In
consideration of the sum of one dollar in hand received and other good and valuable consideration receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged each party signatory hereto for themselves, estate, beneficiaries, officers, directors, affiliates, attorneys,
successors and assigns has remised, released, and forever discharged, and does now, for itself and its heirs, executors, and administrators,
remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharges the other, their estate, assigns, successors, officers, directors, affiliates,
attorneys, brokerage firms facilitating the purchase or sale of SocialPlay common stock, heirs, executors, attorneys in fact,
and administrators, of and from all, and all manner of action and actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts, dues, sums
of money, accounts, reckonings, bonds, bills, specialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, promises, variances,
trespasses, damages, judgments, executions, claims and demands whatsoever, in law, or in equity, which against any party hereto
may have against the other or their successors, heirs, executors or administrators, hereafter can, shall, or may have, for, on,
or by reason of any matter, cause, or thing whatsoever from the beginning of time to the date hereof arising out of any business
transactions between the signatories hereto of any kind or nature.


The
foregoing release is specifically contingent upon release of the Purchase Price to Harrington and delivery of the Shares to Rosner
as more specifically set forth in the Stock Purchase and Settlement Agreement executed between the parties and attached hereto.



This
Release may be executed in any number of counterparts, each counterpart to be deemed an original.


 


[Signatures
on the following page.]



    	 	1	 



    	 



    

 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, this Release is executed as set forth below.


 


	SocialPlay
                           USA Inc.

                            

                            

                            /s/
                           Robert Rosner 
	 

                            

                            

                           Date:
                           December 30, 2016

	 	 
	/s/ Mathew Harrington	Date: December 30, 2016
	 	 
	/s/ Robert Rosner	Date: December 30, 2016










    	 	2
|   | (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: February 22, 2011 |   |   | /s/ G. Richard Smith                                                              |
|                         |   |   | G. Richard SmithPresident and Chief Executive OfficerSunRidge International, Inc. |

----
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE 

EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819 

DCN: SE02959

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT 

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
(August 22, 1991)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anibal Trujillo, Appellant.

— Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (Kane, J.), rendered December 22, 1986, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of sexual abuse in the first degree and burglary in the second degree.

Defendant’s only contention on appeal is that the concurrent prison sentences he received are harsh and excessive. We disagree. The 4 to 12-year prison sentence he received upon his plea of guilty to burglary in the second degree was well within the statutory guidelines *(see,*Penal Law § 70.00 [2] [c]; [3] [b]) and the plea was made in full satisfaction of a three-count indictment. It was while defendant was out on bail on that indictment that he committed the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree involving his four-year-old daughter for which he received a *2 Vs*to 7-year prison sentence. As a result, defendant could have received consecutive rather than concurrent sentences. Finally, defendant pleaded guilty to both crimes knowing that he would receive the sentences ultimately imposed by County Court. Under these circumstances and given defendant’s extensive criminal history, we find neither extraordinary circumstances nor any abuse of discretion which would warrant a reduction in defendant’s sentence *(see, People v Dean,*155 AD2d 774, 775, *lv denied*75 NY2d *951812; *People v Mackey,*136 AD2d 780, 781, *lv denied*71 NY2d 899; *People v McManus,*124 AD2d 305).

Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Yesawich Jr., Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of IVI Communications, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned certifies, 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 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: February 23, 2004             /s/ Charles Roodenburg
                                   ----------------------
                                   Charles Roodenburg, Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2

                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 Quarterly Report of iPayment, Inc. ("the Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005 (the "Report"), I Clay M.
Whitson, Chief Financial Officer of 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:

      (c)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended; and

      (d)   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

This Certification is executed as of November 4, 2005.

                   /s/  CLAY M. WHITSON
                   --------------------------
                   CLAY M. WHITSON
                   CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 121 (Tuesday, September 11, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5860]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

            By Mr. CAMP:
        H.J. Res. 118.
        Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States 
     Constitution, to ``provide for the common Defence and general 
     Welfare of the United States.''

                          ____________________
```
#### Dollar Dry Dock Savings Bank, Respondent, v Hudson Street Development Associates et al., Defendants, and Target Builders, Inc., Appellant.

— Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Irma Santaella, J.), entered on February 7, 1991, which, *inter alia,*granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, to the extent of denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, denying plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendant-appellant Target’s affirmative defenses and counterclaims, vacating the appointment of a Referee, reinstating the affirmative defenses and counterclaims, and the matter is remanded, without costs.

Plaintiff-respondent Dollar Dry Dock moved for summary judgment in this mortgage foreclosure action with respect to a first and a second mortgage it held on the same premises.

Defendant-appellant Target Builders, Inc. commenced a mechanic’s lien foreclosure action against the premises, which was consolidated for trial with the mortgage foreclosure action.

The Motion Court granted the plaintiff-mortgagee’s motion *689for summary judgment of foreclosure and held that, because the two mortgages were filed prior to the filing of the mechanic’s liens, the mechanic’s liens were subordinate. The Motion Court failed to consider whether Lien Law § 22 should apply to subordinate the bank’s mortgages to the mechanic’s lien. Issues of fact include whether the consensual foreclosure stipulation agreed upon by defendant-borrowers materially modified the original building loan agreement, and whether the defendant-subcontractors could qualify as a third party within the meaning of Lien Law § 22.

On this record summary judgment was clearly inappropriate. Discovery should proceed with respect to the affirmative defenses and counterclaims of all subcontractors. Concur— Murphy, P. J., Carro, Kupferman, Asch and Rubin, JJ.
================================================================================


                                  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 Tari Inc. (the  "Company") on Form
10-QSB for the period ended  December 31, 2006 as filed with the  Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  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 operations
         of the Company.



Date:  March 13, 2007

/s/ Theodore Tsagkaris

--------------------------------
Theodore Tsagkaris
President, C.E.O. and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
Certificate of Trust of BAC Capital Trust X



 Exhibit 4.4 
  

CERTIFICATE OF TRUST 
  
 The undersigned, the trustees of BAC Capital Trust X, desiring to form a statutory trust pursuant to Delaware Statutory Trust Act, 12 Del.
C. § 3810, hereby certify as follows: 
  

	 	(a)	The name of the statutory trust being formed hereby (the “Trust”) is “BAC Capital Trust X.” 

  

	 	(b)	The name and business address of the trustee of the Trust which has its principal place of business in the State of Delaware is as follows: 

  
 The Bank of New York (Delaware) 
 502 White Clay Center, Route 273 
 Newark,
Delaware 19711 
  

	 	(c)	This Certificate of Trust shall be effective as of the date of filing. 

  
 Dated: March 30, 2005 
  

	
	
	 /S/ JAMES T. HOUGHTON

	 Name:   James T. Houghton

	 Title: Regular Trustee

	
	 /S/ KAREN A. GOSNELL

	 Name:   Karen A. Gosnell

	 Title: Regular Trustee



  

			
	 THE BANK OF NEW YORK
 (DELAWARE), as Delaware
Trustee

		
	By:	 	 /s/ KRISTINE K. GULLO

	 Name:
	 	 Kristine K. Gullo

	 Title:
	 	 Assistant Vice President