alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2004217EN.01003002.xml

| 28.8.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/30

---

Action brought on 9 June 2004 by European Environmental Bureau and Stichting Natuur en Millieu against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-241/04)

(2004/C 217/54)

Language of the case: English

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 9 June 2004 by by European Environmental Bureau, Brussels, Belgium and Stichting Natuur en Milieu, Utrecht, The Netherlands, represented by Mr P. van den Biesen and Mr B. Arentz, lawyers.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Partially annul Commission Decision 2004/247/EC (1) insofar as it concerns article 2 para 3 and article 3 sub b; |
| --- | --- |

—

Partially annul Commission Decision 2004/247/EC (1) insofar as it concerns article 2 para 3 and article 3 sub b;

1

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs of these proceedings;

Pleas in law and main arguments:

By the contested decision the Commission decided not to amended Annex I to Directive 91/414 (2) so as to include ‘Simazine’ among the active substances listed there. Article 4 of Directive 91/414 states that only plant protection products containing substances listed in Annex I may be authorised by Member States. By refusing to include Simazine in Annex I the Commission decided not to allow further use of plant protection products containing this substance.

2

The applicants do not challenge this aspect of the decision but rather certain transitional provisions which allow until 30 June 2007 and subject to conditions aimed at minimising risk certain limited uses of products containing Simazine. In the preamble to its decision the Commission justified these transitional measures through the current absence of efficient alternatives and the need to allow time for their development.

In support of their application the applicants invoke the pleas and arguments invoked by the same applicants in case T-236/04.

---

(1)  OJ L 78 16.3.2004 p. 50.

1

(2)  Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, Official Journal L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1-32.

2

---
EXHIBIT 32.1



                                  CERTIFICATION
                          REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OR
                    RULE 15d-14(b) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
          (AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

           I, Floyd Warkol, as Chief Executive Officer of KSW, Inc., (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350 (as adopted by Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), that to my knowledge:

           (1) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2004 (the "Report"), filed with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Dated:  May 14, 2004


                                                     /s/ Floyd Warkol
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Floyd Warkol
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
# C_2005013EN.01001801.xml

| 19.1.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 13/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 13/18

---

‘TRAINING OF NATIONAL JUDGES IN EC COMPETITION LAW’ and ‘JUDICIAL COOPERATION BETWEEN NATIONAL JUDGES’

TRAINING OF NATIONAL JUDGES IN EC COMPETITION LAW

JUDICIAL COOPERATION BETWEEN NATIONAL JUDGES

(2005/C 13/08)

A new call for proposals on TRAINING OF NATIONAL JUDGES IN EC COMPETITION LAW and JUDICIAL COOPERATION BETWEEN NATIONAL JUDGES has been published on http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/competition/proposals2/

Deadline for application: 04/03/2005

---
Exhibit 12.1

COLONIAL REALTY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

(all amounts in thousands)
December 31, 2000

Description                               12/31/00                   12/31/99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fixed Charges:

Interest expense                          $ 71,855                    $ 57,211
Capitalized interest                         9,553                       8,664
Debt costs amortization                      1,224                       2,100
                                         ---------------------------------------
Total Fixed Charges                       $ 82,632                    $ 67,975

Earnings Plus Fixed Charges:

Income before property sales and
   extraordinary items               A    $ 61,825                    $ 69,195
Fixed Charges                               82,632                      67,975
                                        ----------------------------------------
Total                                    $ 144,457                   $ 137,170

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges            1.75                        2.02
                                        ========================================


A    Income  before  extraordinary  items and minority  interest less gain (plus
     loss) on sale of properties less capitalized interest.
*

 Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except underthe limited circumstancessetforth inLocalRule

47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20900

Summary Calendar

PAMALA D. BURGIN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

JOHN J. CALLAHAN, COMMISSIONER

OF SOCIAL SECURITY,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

(H-96-CV-645)

April 15, 1997

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, JONES AND SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Pamala Burgin appeals an adverse judgment granting the Commissioner’s

motion for summary judgment and affirming her decision respecting Burgin’s
1Gill v. Heckler, 740 F.2d 396, 397 (5th Cir. 1984);see Thibodeaux v. Bowen, 819 F.2d

76 (5th Cir. 1987).

2

February 1992 application for Supplemental Security Income benefits under

Title XVI of the Social Security Act and refusing to reopen a prior decision

denying disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. Burgin

contendsthat the Commissioner erred in failing to: (1) consider her application for

disability benefits as a concurrent claim under Title II and Title XVI; and

(2) process her application in accordance with new guidelines requiring

consideration of an onset date of disability prior to the date of the SSI application.

Remand is necessary, Burgin maintains, for consideration of the report of a

physician establishing an earlier disability onset date.

Burgin concedes that her insured status, and thus eligibility for Title II

benefits, expired during the period between September 30, 1991 and December 31,

1991, prior to the date of a final decision denying her previous Title II application.

A prior determination of nondisability is “binding on all parties to the hearing and

has a res judicata effect as to that record.”1 Although the Commissioner may

reopen a prior application under some circumstances, the decision denying a

petition to reopen is not reviewable by this court except to the extent that the appeal
2Torres v. Shalala, 48 F.3d 887 (5th Cir. 1995) (citing Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S.

99 (1977)).

3

raises a colorable constitutional question.2 Burgin has not raised a colorable

constitutional question but, rather, merely attempts to circumvent the

nonappealability oftheCommissioner’s decision denying her petition to reopen the

Title II application. Accordingly, the district court’s judgment affirming the

Commissioner’s decision is AFFIRMED.
Submitted on record and briefs August 20,

convictions affirmed; restitution as condition of probation stricken October 10, 1990

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*JAMES EDWARD SIMMS, *Appellant.*

(C88-09-36506; CA A60375)

797 P2d 1080

Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, Salem, and Irene B. Taylor, Salem, filed the brief for appellant.

Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Ann Kelley, Assistant Attorney General, and Lauri Alsup, Certified Law Student, Salem, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Joseph, Chief Judge, and Rossman and De Muniz, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*641PER CURIAM

Defendant was indicted with a co-defendant in a 9-count indictment. Only Counts 1 through 6 accused defendant and his co-defendant. The other counts pertained to the co-defendant alone; two of those counts involved the property of Dong Nguyen. Defendant was convicted on Counts 2, 3, 4 and 5; on Count 5, the court imposed a suspended sentence and placed defendant on probation, subject to the condition that he pay restitution for damage to Nguyen’s property.

The state concedes that the trial court erred. Nguyen was not a victim of defendant’s criminal activities, and defendant was not convicted of and did not admit either of the counts that related to Nguyen’s property. Restitution was not authorized. ORS 137.106(1).

Convictions affirmed; restitution as condition of probation stricken.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                       5
<LEGEND>                        THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL DATA
                                FROM THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED AS PART
                                OF 360 COMMUNICATIONS' SECOND QUARTER 10Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                    0001003959
<NAME>                          360 COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                        8,108
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               107,915
<ALLOWANCES>                                  6,243
<INVENTORY>                                  32,771
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            232,651
<PP&E>                                    1,556,847
<DEPRECIATION>                              466,360
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            2,924,135
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       293,464
<BONDS>                                   1,844,577
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                      1,233
<OTHER-SE>                                  475,068
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              2,924,135
<SALES>                                      24,304
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            647,108
<CGS>                                        52,843
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                81,772
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            124,367
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             13,618
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           64,033
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              59,528
<INCOME-TAX>                                 28,276
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          31,252
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                 31,252
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.25
        

</TABLE>
# C_2005093EN.01000301.xml

| 16.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/3

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 24 February 2005

in Case C-327/04: Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2000/43/EC - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2005/C 93/05)

Language of the case: Finnish

In Case C-327/04, action for a declaration under Article 226 EC, brought on 27 July 2004, Commission of the European Communities (Agents: D. Martin and M. Huttunen) v Republic of Finland (Agent: T. Pynnä) – the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of R. Silva de Lapuerta, President of the Chamber, J. Makarczyk and J. Klučka (Rapporteur), Judges; P. Leger, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 24 February 2005, in which it:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt, as regards the province of Åland, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt, as regards the province of Åland, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Republic of Finland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 239 of 25.09.2004.

1

---
CERTIFICATION OF CORPORATE
CONTROLLER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION

906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002



In connection with the
Annual Report (the "Report") of Digerati Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period
ending July 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Antonio Estrada Jr., Sr.
Vice President of Finance & Corporate Controller and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,



| | 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 in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|By | /s/ Antonio Estrada Jr.                                  | 
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------- | 
|   | Antonio Estrada Jr.                                      | 
|   | Sr. Vice President of Finance & Corporate Controller and | 
|   | Principal Financial Officer                              | 
|   | November 15, 2012                                        |
# C_2005045EN.01000102.xml

| 19.2.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 45/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/1

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 9 December 2004

in Case C-19/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof):
  Viktor Hlozek
  v
  Roche Austria Gesellschaft mbH

   (1)

Viktor Hlozek

Roche Austria Gesellschaft mbH

1

((Social policy - Male and female workers - Equal pay - Pay - Concept - Bridging allowance (‘Überbrückungsgeld’) provided for by a works agreement - Social plan drawn up as part of an operation to restructure an undertaking - Benefit granted to workers having reached a certain age at the time of their dismissal - Benefit granted from a different age according to the sex of the dismissed workers - Account taken of national statutory retirement age, different according to sex))

(2005/C 45/02)

Language of the case: German

In Case C-19/02: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria), made by decision of 20 December 2001, received at the Court on 29 January 2002, in the proceedings between Viktor Hlozek and Roche Austria Gesellschaft mbH Ä the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the Chamber, A. Rosas (Rapporteur), R. Silva de Lapuerta, K. Lenaerts and S. von Bahr, Judges; J. Kokott, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 9 December 2004, in which it has ruled:

Viktor Hlozek

Roche Austria Gesellschaft mbH

A bridging allowance such as that at issue in the main proceedings falls under the concept of ‘pay’ within the meaning of Article 141 EC and Article 1 of Council Directive 75/117/EEC of 10 February 1975 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women. In circumstances such as those of the main proceedings, those provisions do not preclude the application of a social plan providing for a difference in the treatment of male and female workers in terms of the age at which they are entitled to a bridging allowance, since, under the national statutory scheme governing early retirement pensions, they are in different situations with regard to the factors relevant to the grant of that allowance.

---

(1)  OJ C 109 of 04.05.2002.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6779

RONALD MCCLARY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JOSEPH LIGHTSEY; PAMELA HENDERSON; MITCHELL LAWSON; 

HERIBERTO SIERRA,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:16-ct-03052-BO)

Submitted: September 18, 2018 Decided: September 21, 2018

Before WILKINSON and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald McClary, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Houston Foppiano, Gary Adam Moyers, 

BATTEN LEE, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee Heriberto Sierra.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ronald McClary seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting in part and 

denying in part motions for summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings. This court 

may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain 

interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); 

Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). The order McClary 

seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Heymer, Respondent, vs. Knauf & Tesch Company, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Calumet county dated January 15, 1927: Fred Beglinger, Judge.

Action for damages. Judgment for plaintiff, from which defendant appeals.

For the appellant: L. *P. Fox*of Chilton.

For the respondent: *T. L. Doyle*of Fond du Lac.

*By the Court.*—

Judgment affirmed.
#### Grady, Appellant, vs. Vernon Mutual Fire Insurance Company, Respondent.

For the appellant: *Edward J. Burke*of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Salen & Brenner*of Waukesha.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
# C_2004179EN.01000301.xml

| 10.7.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.7.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/3

---

Action brought on 22 April 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Italian Republic

(Case C-187/04)

(2004/C 179/05)

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 22 April 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by K. Wiedner and G. Bambara, acting as Agents.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Declare that, since ANAS S.p.A. awarded the concession for the construction and management of the Valtrompia motorway to the Società per l'autostrada Brescia-Verona-Vicenza-Padova p.a., by direct concession by means of a contract signed on 7 December 1999 without prior publication of a contract notice, and where the requirements for such a concession were not met, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 93/37/EEC (1) of 14 June 1993 coordinating the procedures for the award of public works contracts and in particular Articles 3(1) and 11(3), (6) and (7) thereof; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, since ANAS S.p.A. awarded the concession for the construction and management of the Valtrompia motorway to the Società per l'autostrada Brescia-Verona-Vicenza-Padova p.a., by direct concession by means of a contract signed on 7 December 1999 without prior publication of a contract notice, and where the requirements for such a concession were not met, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Council Directive 93/37/EEC (1) of 14 June 1993 coordinating the procedures for the award of public works contracts and in particular Articles 3(1) and 11(3), (6) and (7) thereof;

1

| — | Order the Italian Republic to pay to the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Italian Republic to pay to the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

According to the Commission, ANAS's concession relating to the construction and management of the Valtrompia motorway without prior publication of a contract notice does not comply with Directive 93/37/EEC and in particular with Articles 3(1) and 11(3), (6) and (7) thereof.

Article 3 of the Directive provides for the application of certain advertising rules at Community level where the contracting authorities conclude a public works concession contract if the value of that contract exceeds EUR 5 million. In particular, under Article 11(3) of the directive, contracting authorities wishing to award a works concession contract must make known that intention by means of a contract notice to be sent, pursuant to Article 11(7) of the directive, to the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

Since the contract for the construction and management of the Valtrompia motorway is worth approximately EUR 640 million, it clearly should have been the subject of publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Official Journal of the European Communities

---

(1)  OJ L 199 of 9.8.1993, p. 54.

1

---