alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2023054EN.01001401.xml

| 13.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 54/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 54/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 15 December 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Caxamar — Comércio e Indústria de Bacalhau SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-23/22) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - State aid - Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 - Exemption of certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market - Guidelines on regional State aid - Scope - Exclusions - Fishery and aquaculture sector - Sector for the processing and marketing of agricultural products - Concept of ‘agricultural products’ - Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 - Common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products - Annex I - Activity of processing of fishery and aquaculture products - Salted, frozen and desalted cod)

(2023/C 54/16)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Caxamar — Comércio e Indústria de Bacalhau SA

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1 and Article 2(10) and (11) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 [TFEU] as well as the Guidelines on regional State aid for 2014-2020, read in conjunction with Article 2 and Article 5(a) and (d) of, and Annex I to, Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products, amending Council Regulations (EC) No 1184/2006 and (EC) No 1224/2009 and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 104/2000,

must be interpreted as meaning that an activity of processing of fishery and aquaculture products, such as the production of salted cod, frozen cod and desalted cod, does not constitute an activity of processing of agricultural products, which is excluded from the scope of Regulation No 651/2014 by reason of Article 1(3)(c) of that regulation, but rather an activity falling within the fishery and aquaculture sector, which is excluded from the scope of that regulation by reason of Article 1(3)(a) thereof.

---

(1)  OJ C 165, 19.4.2022.

---
August 13, 2012

No. 11A857.

#### Rewanwar *v.*Wisconsin Supreme Court et al.

C. A. 7th Cir. Application for stay, addressed to The Chief Justice and referred to the Court, denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                  Subsidiaries of Mission Resources Corporation

                                                      State of Incorporation
                                                         of Organization
                                                      ----------------------
      Bellwether Cayman, Inc.                              Cayman Islands
      Black Hawk Oil Company                                  Delaware
      Mission E&P Limited Partnership                          Texas
      Mission Holdings LLC                                    Delaware
      Pan American Energy Finance Corp                        Delaware
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL IFNORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 9/30/97
RALSTON  PURINA  CO.  BALANCE  SHEET  AND  RESTATED  9/30/97  RALSTON PURINA CO.
STATEMENT  OF  EARNINGS  AND  IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>                                1000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      109,100
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               700,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 24,800
<INVENTORY>                                 604,800
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          1,505,500
<PP&E>                                    2,160,600
<DEPRECIATION>                            1,046,900
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                            4,741,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     1,215,800
<BONDS>                                   1,860,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       304,900
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                     11,500
<OTHER-SE>                                  905,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              4,741,800
<SALES>                                   4,486,800
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          4,486,800
<CGS>                                     2,276,400<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             2,276,400<F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          1,649,400<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              3,100
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          173,000<F1>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             384,900
<INCOME-TAX>                                 70,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         348,900
<DISCONTINUED>                               74,800
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                423,700
<EPS-BASIC>                                  1.34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.27
<FN>
<F1> AMOUNT  HAS  BEEN  RESTATED  TO  CONFORM  TO  THE  FISCAL  YEAR  END  1999
     PRESENTATION.



</TABLE>
No. 11-10485.

#### Gonzalez-Lopez *v.*United States.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Scott Epperson, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports onForm 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report onForm 10-K of the GS Mortgage Securities Trust 2015-GC28 (the "Exchange Actperiodic reports");

 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, takenas a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing andother information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the periodcovered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statementsrequired in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except asdisclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilledtheir obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicingcriteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports onassessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesrequired to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 ofRegulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as anexhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Anymaterial instances of noncompliance described in such reports have beendisclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied oninformation provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:

 

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, RialtoCapital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer, Wilmington Trust, NationalAssociation, as Trustee, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as CertificateAdministrator, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Custodian, PentalphaSurveillance LLC, as Operating Advisor, CoreLogic Solutions, LLC, as ServicingFunction Participant, Berkeley Point Capital LLC d/b/a Newmark Knight Frank, asPrimary Servicer, Computershare Trust Company, National Association, asServicing Function Participant for the Certificate Administrator, andComputershare Trust Company, National Association, as Servicing FunctionParticipant for the Custodian.

 

 

 

Dated:March 14, 2023

 

 

/s/ Scott Epperson

Scott Epperson

Chief Executive Officer

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the balance
sheet of CNL Income Fund III, Ltd. at September 30, 1997, and its statement
of income for the nine months then ended and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to the Form 10-Q of CNL Income Fund III, Ltd. for the nine
months ended September 30, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         795,777
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  227,111
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,816
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                      18,182,520
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,298,582
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              18,833,287
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,974,130
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                18,833,287
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,675,198
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  425,173
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,160,829
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,160,829
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,160,829
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Due to the nature of its industry, CNL Income Fund III, Ltd. has an
unclassified balance-sheet; therefore, no values are shown above for current
assets and current liabilities.
</FN>

        




</TABLE>
<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 5 MONTHS ENDED AUGUST 31, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   5-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1995
<CASH>                                             361
<SECURITIES>                                     1,260
<RECEIVABLES>                                      710
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        654
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,740
<PP&E>                                         118,988
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,879
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 121,745
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,583
<BONDS>                                         45,538
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            63
<OTHER-SE>                                      59,050
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   121,745
<SALES>                                            781
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   890
<CGS>                                            1,400
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,907
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,920
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,337)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,689)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,648)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                        1,249
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,399)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.15)
        



</TABLE>
# C_2021502EN.01003801.xml

| 13.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 502/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 502/38

---

Action brought on 12 October 2021 — BAWAG PSK v ECB

(Case T-667/21)

(2021/C 502/57)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: BAWAG PSK Bank für Arbeit und Wirtschaft und Österreichische Postsparkasse AG (Wien, Austria) (represented by: H. Bälz and D. Bliesener, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s decision of 2 August 2021 (1); and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision of 2 August 2021 (1); and

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the defendant is incompetent to impose absorption interest under Sec. 97(1) of the Austrian Banking Act (‘BWG’). |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant is incompetent to impose absorption interest under Sec. 97(1) of the Austrian Banking Act (‘BWG’).

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the imposition of absorption interest under Sec. 97(1) BWG is time barred. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the imposition of absorption interest under Sec. 97(1) BWG is time barred.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the applicant did not breach the large exposure limit provided in Art. 395(1) of Regulation (EU) No 375/2013 (2). |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the applicant did not breach the large exposure limit provided in Art. 395(1) of Regulation (EU) No 375/2013 (2).

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the contested decision infringes the applicant’s right to be heard. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the contested decision infringes the applicant’s right to be heard.

| 5. | Fifth plea in law, alleging that the defendant incorrectly calculated the amount of absorption interest under Sec. 97(1) BWG. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Fifth plea in law, alleging that the defendant incorrectly calculated the amount of absorption interest under Sec. 97(1) BWG.

---

(1)  No SSM- 2021-ATBAW-7_ESA-2018-0000126.

(2)  Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 Text with EEA relevance (OJ 2013 L 176, p. 1-337).

---
No. 11-10598.

#### Taylor v. Utah.

Sup. Ct. Utah. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND FROM THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FROM THE SIX
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         244,549
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  6,020
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         1,421,043
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,807,391
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0<F1>
<BONDS>                                        2,215,137
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (589,603)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,807,391
<SALES>                                        509,813
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               516,664
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  363,846
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             160,194
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,376)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,376)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,376)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1>THE PARTNERSHIP HAS AN UNCLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET; THEREFORE, THE VALUE IS
$0.
<F2>THIS INFORMATION HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED IN THE PARTNERSHIP'S FORM 10-Q
FILING.
</FN>



</TABLE>
<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 PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1995
<CASH>                                             250
<SECURITIES>                                     1,260
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,563
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      5,751
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                29,129
<PP&E>                                         121,794
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,742
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 141,156
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,088
<BONDS>                                         48,028
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            66
<OTHER-SE>                                      59,307
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   141,156
<SALES>                                         20,840
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                21,703
<CGS>                                            9,534
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      737
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 616
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 10,816
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,246
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,570
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,570
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .97
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .97
#### IN RE: Sarkis ANTABIAN, Debtor, Sarkis Antabian, Appellant, v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Appellee.

No. 17-60002

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 6, 2018 * Pasadena, California

Filed February 8, 2018

Jayne T. Kaplan, Esquire, Jayne T. Kaplan, Pasadena, CA, for Appellant

J. Alexandra Rhim, Attorney, Hemar, Rousso & Heald LLP, Encino, CA, for Appellee

Before: CALLAHAN and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and PRATT,** District Judge.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Sarkis Antabian appeals a judgment by the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”), which affirmed the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of Antabian’s adversary complaint against Wells Fargo *779Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).1 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d) and affirm.

1. We agree with Antabian and the BAP that the sale of the subject property during the pendency of Antabian’s appeal to the BAP does not render the case moot. As the BAP pointed out, “the foreclosure sale generated cash proceeds, which were paid to Wells Fargo,” and “[t]he issue of Wells Fargo’s entitlement to those proceeds remains a live controversy.”

2. We “review[ ] decisions of the BAP de novo and appl[y] the same standard of review that the BAP applied to the bankruptcy court’s ruling.” *In re Deitz,*760 F.3d 1038, 1039 (9th Cir. 2014) (order). We review a dismissal under Rule 41(b) for abuse of discretion. *In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Prod. Liab. Litig.,*460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006) (en banc). Although dismissal is a harsh penalty, “we will overturn a dismissal sanction only if we have a definite and firm conviction .that it was clearly outside the acceptable range of sanctions.” *Id.*(quoting *Malone v. U.S. Postal Serv.,*833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987)).

The bankruptcy court applied the correct legal standard under Rule 41(b). *See In re Phenylpropanolamine,*460 F.3d at 1226 (discussing factors a court should consider in determining whether to dismiss under Rule 41(b)). The bankruptcy court made explicit findings as to each of the essential factors, concluding that four of the five factors weighed in favor of dismissal. The court’s analysis of the relevant factors is reasonable and supported by the record. Although the facts do not compel dismissal, the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in electing to do so.2

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. Antabian also appealed from a separate, but identical BAP judgment. The other case, No, 17-60001, is resolved by a separate memorandum disposition.

2

. Because Wells Fargo’s motion to dismiss and the bankruptcy court’s order were based on Rule 41(b), we reject Antabian’s argument that the dismissal of his adversary complaint is governed by Rule 37, instead of Rule 41(b).