alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022359EN.01004901.xml

| 19.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/49

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Ravensburg (Germany) lodged on 8 July 2022 — VX and AT v Gemeinde Ummendorf

(Case C-456/22)

(2022/C 359/57)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Ravensburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: VX, AT

Defendant: Gemeinde Ummendorf

Question referred

Is the concept of non-material damage in Article 82(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the assumption of non-material damage requires a noticeable disadvantage and an objectively comprehensible impairment of personal interests, or is the mere short-term loss of the data subject’s unfettered control over his or her data due to the publication of personal data on the internet for a period of a few days, which did not have any noticeable or adverse consequences for the data subject, sufficient for that purpose?

---

(1)  Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (OJ 2016 L 119, p. 1).

---
# C_2022303EN.01001202.xml

| 8.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/12

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 21 April 2022 — Criminal proceedings against IP, DD, ZI, SS and HYa

(Case C-269/22)

(2022/C 303/17)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad

Accused persons

IP, DD, ZI, SS and HYa

Question referred

Do the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter, which establishes the requirement of a fair trial, and Article 48(1) of the Charter, which establishes the presumption of innocence, preclude a request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU in which certain acts of the accused persons are presumed to be established, where, before submitting the request for a preliminary ruling, the referring court respected all the procedural safeguards required for a decision on the merits?

---
No. 11-10501.

#### Cazarez *v.*United States Parole Commission.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 

NOTATION OF GUARANTEE 

March 13, 2014 
 For good
and valuable consideration, AT&T Inc., as Guarantor (“Parent Guarantor”) (which term includes any successor Person under the Indenture) has, jointly and severally, unconditionally and irrevocably guaranteed, to the extent set forth in
the Supplemental Indenture, dated as of the date hereof, by and among Cricket Communications, Inc. (the “Company”), Parent Guarantor, the other Guarantors (as defined in the Indenture) and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee
(the “Trustee”) (the “Supplemental Indenture”), to the Indenture, dated as of November 19, 2010, among the Company, the other Guarantors (as defined in the Indenture) and the Trustee (together with the Supplemental
Indenture, the “Indenture”), and subject to the provisions in the Supplemental Indenture, (a) the due and punctual payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Notes (as defined in the Indenture), whether at
maturity, by acceleration, redemption or otherwise, and the due and punctual payment of interest on overdue principal premium, if any, and interest on the Notes, if lawful (subject in all cases to any applicable grace period provided herein), and
the due and punctual performance of all other obligations of the Company to the Holders or the Trustee all in accordance with the terms of the Indenture and the Notes and (b) in case of any extension of time of payment or renewal of any Notes
or any of such other obligations, the same will be promptly paid in full when due or performed in accordance with the terms of the extension or renewal, whether at stated maturity, by acceleration or otherwise. The obligations of Parent Guarantor to
the Holders of Notes and to the Trustee pursuant to the Note Guarantee and the Indenture are expressly set forth in the Indenture and reference is hereby made to the Indenture for the precise terms of the Note Guarantee. 







 IN WITNESS HEREOF, Parent Guarantor has caused this Notation of Guarantee to be signed manually
or by facsimile by its duly authorized officer. 
 AT&T INC. 
  

			
		
	By:	 	/s/ Jonathan P. Klug
	Name:	 	Jonathan P. Klug
	 Title:
	 	Senior Vice President and Treasurer
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:FAA-2014-0522 (2014-NM-087-AD)
EXHIBIT 32


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the
undersigned officer of the Cabinet Acquisition Corporation
(the "Company"), hereby certify to my knowledge that:

The Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended Setpember 30,
2008 of the Company fully complies, in all material respects,
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the
Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.


                             /s/ James M. Cassidy
                                 President and Director and
                                 Chief Executivie Officer,
                                 Chief Financial Officer and
                                 Principal Accounting Officer
Date: November 7, 2008
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 50611

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

–

Appellee ,

v ersus
RONALD MEJIA

- H ERNANDEZ , Defendant

– Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the West ern District of Texas USDC No. 1 :1 5

- CR

- 68

- 1

Befor e SMITH, WIENER, and GRAV ES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The issue on appeal is whether 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague under John son v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). This matter was

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances se t forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 25, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-50611 Document: 00513652269 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/25/2016No. 15

- 50611

2 put on hold awaiting a decision in No. 15

- 40041. That appeal has now been decided. See United States v. Gonzalez

- Longoria , 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 14460 (5th Cir. Aug. 5, 2016) (en banc) (holding against vagueness). The parties have filed, at the court’s request, letter briefs addressing the proper disposit ion

. The appellant’s attorney, the Federal Public Defender, advises that the case is moot, irrespective of the opinion in Gonzalez

- Longoria , because the appellant has completed his term of imprisonment, ha s been released from federal custody, and presumab ly has been deported, and he did not challenge the unexpired period of supervised release. See United States v. Heredia

- Holguin
, 823 F.3d 337, 343 n.3 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc). The govern

ment urges affirmance or, in the alternative, dismissal for mootn ess. The appeal is DISMISSED as moot. Case: 15-50611 Document: 00513652269 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/25/2016
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 147 (Thursday, July 31, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 44263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: C1-2014-16037]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9 CFR Parts 56, 145, 146, and 147

[Docket No. APHIS-2011-0101]
RIN 0579-AD83

National Poultry Improvement Plan and Auxiliary Provisions

Correction

    In rule document 2014-16037 appearing on pages 38752-38768 in the 
issue of Wednesday, July 9, 2014, make the following correction:

Sec.  147.21  [Corrected]

0
1. In section 147.21, on page 38766, in the second column, the thirty-
seventh through fortieth lines should read: ``Program Standards, as 
defined in Sec.  147.51. Sanitation procedures may also be approved by 
the Administrator in accordance with Sec.  147.53(d)(2).''

[FR Doc. C1-2014-16037 Filed 7-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
# C_2022095EN.01004001.xml

| 28.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/40

---

Action brought on 14 December 2021 — Lila Rossa Engros v EUIPO (LiLAC)

(Case T-780/21)

(2022/C 95/56)

Language of the case: Romanian

Parties

Applicant: Lila Rossa Engros SRL (Voluntari, Romania) (represented by: O. Anghel, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for the black EU figurative mark LiLAC — Application for registration No 18 243 487

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 September 2021 in Case R 441/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | uphold the present action; |
| --- | --- |

—

uphold the present action;

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | grant the application for registration No 18 243 487 for the mark LiLAC in respect of all the goods and services applied for; |
| --- | --- |

—

grant the application for registration No 18 243 487 for the mark LiLAC in respect of all the goods and services applied for;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Incorrect application of the criteria for analysing the absolute grounds for refusal laid down by the case-law. |
| --- | --- |

—

Incorrect application of the criteria for analysing the absolute grounds for refusal laid down by the case-law.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NORTHLAND CRANBERRIES, INC. AS OF AND FOR
THE 6 MONTHS ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY 
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1996
<CASH>                                           1,481
<SECURITIES>                                     1,260
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,883
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     19,547
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                33,124
<PP&E>                                         158,337
<DEPRECIATION>                                  20,912
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 174,489
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,881
<BONDS>                                         75,265
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           138
<OTHER-SE>                                      67,390
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   174,489
<SALES>                                         23,190
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,433
<CGS>                                           11,173
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,334
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,910
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,016
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,988
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,028
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,028
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 46 (Monday, March 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10836]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5760]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. TM97-4-30-000]


Trunkline Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

March 4, 1997.
    Take notice that on February 28, 1997, Trunkline Gas Company 
(Trunkline) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective 
April 1, 1997:

Twentieth Revised Sheet No. 6
Nineteenth Revised Sheet No. 7
Twentieth Revised Sheet No. 8
Twentieth Revised Sheet No. 9
Second Revised Sheet No. 9A
Nineteenth Revised Sheet No. 10
Fifth Revised Sheet No. 10A

    Trunkline states that this filing is being made in accordance with 
Section 22 (Fuel Reimbursement Adjustment) of Trunkline's FERC Gas 
Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1. The revised tariff sheets reflect: 
a (0.14)% decrease (Field Zone to Zone 2), a (0.18)% decrease (Zone 1A 
to Zone 2), a (0.05)% decrease (Zone 1B to Zone 2), a 0.04% increase 
(Zone 2 only), a (0.19)% decrease (Field Zone to Zone 1B), a (0.23)% 
decrease (Zone 1A to Zone 1B), a (0.10)% decrease (Zone 1B only), a 
(0.10)% decrease (Field Zone to Zone 1A), a (0.14)% decrease (Zone 1A 
only) and a 0.03% increase (Field Zone only) to the currently effective 
fuel reimbursement percentages.
    Trunkline states that copies of this filing are being served on all 
affected shippers and interested state regulatory agencies.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-5760 Filed 3-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 11-1351.

#### Levin *v.*United States et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari granted.
Exhibit 11

                 PULASKI FURNITURE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

                               November 1,      November 2,      November 3,
                                   1998             1997            1996
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numerator:
  Net Income (loss)               $6,397,397      $(2,422,844)     $4,308,067
  Numerator for
     dilutive earnings per
     share-income available
     available to common
     shareholders after
     assumed conversions          $6,397,397      $(2,422,844)     $4,308,067
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Denominator:
  Denominator for basic
     earnings per share-
     weighted average shares       2,819,838        2,789,628       2,838,836

Effect or dilutive
securities:
     Employee stock options            7,890          -------           4,164
     Stock purchase plan              12,348          -------          15,303
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Denominator for
     dilutive earnings per
     share-adjusted weighted
     average shares after          2,840,076        2,789,628       2,858,303
     assumed conversions
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Basic earnings (loss) per             $ 2.27           $ (.87)         $ 1.52
  share
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dilutive earnings (loss) per
  share                               $ 2.25           $ (.87)         $ 1.51
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7782

JOHN ANTHONY TURNER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD MOATS, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE

STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA97-1585-S)

Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 13, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Anthony Turner, Appellant Pro Se. Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

John Anthony Turner seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Turner v. Moats, No. CA-97-1585-S (D.

Md. Dec. 2, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

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

The motion for appointment of counsel is denied.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.1
 Certification of
Chief Executive Officer & Chief Financial Officer
of VCA Antech, Inc.
   (i)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.
  /s/ Robert L. AntinRobert L. AntinChief Executive Officer/s/ Tomas W. FullerTomas W. FullerChief Financial Officer 35
#### COM. v. ATKINSON, D.

1562 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/29/2017

MC-51-CR-0001158-2013 (Philadelphia)

Affirmed
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 9820]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5280]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[STB Finance Docket No. 33366]


Paducah & Louisville Railway, Trackage Rights Exemption, CSX 
Transportation, Inc.

    CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSXT) has agreed to grant overhead 
trackage rights to Paducah & Louisville Railway (P&L) from the P&L/CSXT 
connection at a point approximately 2,100 feet north of milepost 179 at 
Central City, KY, to approximately milepost 172 south of Drakesboro, 
KY, and between Drakesboro (Valuation Station 0+00) and the junction 
with trackage leased to Midwest Coal Handling Co., Inc. (Valuation 
Station 47+88), a total distance of approximately 8.9 miles in 
Muhlenberg County, KY.
    The transaction is scheduled to be consummated on March 1, 1997.
    As a condition to this exemption, any employees affected by the 
trackage rights will be protected by the conditions imposed in Norfolk 
and Western Ry. Co.--Trackage Rights--BN, 354 I.C.C. 605 (1978), as 
modified in Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.--Lease and Operate, 360 I.C.C. 
653 (1980).
    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If it contains 
false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab initio. 
Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed 
at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not automatically 
stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 33366, must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, Office of the Secretary, Case Control Branch, 1201 Constitution 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20423.<SUP>1 In addition, a copy of each 
pleading must be served on J. Thomas Garrett, Esq., Paducah & 
Louisville Railway, 1500 Kentucky Avenue, Paducah, KY 42003.

    \1\ Due to the Board's scheduled relocation on March 16, 1997, 
any filings made after March 16, 1997, must be filed with the 
Surface Transportation Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20423-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Decided: February 25, 1997.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-5280 Filed 3-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
# C_2023235EN.01000601.xml

| 3.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 17 May 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance du Luxembourg — Belgium) — SA CEZAM v État belge

(Case C-418/22, (1) Cezam)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2006/112/EC - Value added tax (VAT) - Obligations to declare and pay VAT - Article 273 - Penalties laid down for the failure of a taxable person to comply with the obligations - Principles of proportionality and neutrality of VAT - Right to deduct VAT - Compatibility of penalties)

(2023/C 235/08)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance du Luxembourg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SA CEZAM

Defendant: État belge

Operative part of the judgment

Article 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax and the principles of proportionality and fiscal neutrality

must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation pursuant to which the failure to comply with the obligation to declare and pay value added tax (VAT) to the Treasury is penalised by a flat-rate fine amounting to 20 % of the amount of VAT which would have been due before subtracting deductible VAT, subject to the checks to be carried out by the referring court as regards the proportionate nature of the fine imposed in the case in the main proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 359, 19.9.2022.

---