alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2013108EN.01002801.xml

| 13.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/28

---

Action brought on 7 January 2013 — Group Nivelles v OHIM — Easy Sanitairy Solutions (Representation of a shower drainage pipe)

(Case T-15/13)

2013/C 108/72

Language in which the application was lodged: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Group Nivelles (Gingelom, Belgium) (represented by: H. Jonkhout, lawyer)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Easy Sanitairy Solutions BV (Losser, Netherlands)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 4 October 2012 in Case 2004/2010-3 and, correcting the grounds as necessary, uphold the decision of the Cancellation Division of OHIM of 23 September 2010 in Case ICD 000007024, notification of the latter decision having been received on 1 October 2010. |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 4 October 2012 in Case 2004/2010-3 and, correcting the grounds as necessary, uphold the decision of the Cancellation Division of OHIM of 23 September 2010 in Case ICD 000007024, notification of the latter decision having been received on 1 October 2010.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Design representing a shower drainage pipe — Community design No 107834-0025

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

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Easy Sanitairy Solutions BV

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: Group Nivelles

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark:

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: Articles 4 to 9 of Regulation No 6/2002

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Design declared invalid.

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulment of the decision of the Cancellation Division

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: The Board of Appeal’s decision is based on incorrect grounds and, in factual terms, on a false point of comparison.

Pleas in law:

---
tnGustrlal Sites Controlled by Others 

[X] C81- entfre,pap
No. 10-7094.

#### Michael Pete, Petitioner v. Carl White, Warden.

562 U.S. 1145, 131 S. Ct. 917,

178 L. Ed. 2d 765,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 225.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
DLA Energy partners with DOE’s emergency petroleum stockpiles
 
  By Elizabeth Stoeckmann
                            DLA Energy Americas (at Houston) Quality/Technical Support
# Korea distribution center welcomes new commander

/ Published June 16, 2016
CAMP CARROL, Korea, 
Army Maj. Gary D. Whittacre assumed command of Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Korea in a ceremony June 16.  The ceremony was officiated by DLA Distribution’s Army Reserve Element team leader and Joint Reserve Task Force commander Army Col. Ronnie M. Davis.
A native of Fredericksburg, Va., Whittacre was commissioned as a transportation officer upon successfully completing Officers Candidate School at Fort Benning, Ga.  He received a Master of Business Administration from Columbia University. 

Whittacer’s previous assignments include brigade executive officer, U.S. Army Materiel Support Command, Korea; chief of operations, DLA Energy Middle East at Naval Support Activity, Bahrain; secretary of the General Staff 19th ESC, at Camp Henry, Korea; battalion executive officer, 837th Transportation Battalion, at Busan, Korea; brigade operations officer, 595th Transportation Brigade, at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait; company commander Headquarters Support Company, 603rd Aviation Support Battalion, 3rd Infantry Division, at Fort Stewart, Ga.; assistant brigade operations officer, 375th Transportation Brigade, Victory Base Complex, Baghdad, Iraq; detachment commander 635th Movement Control Team, 27th Transportation Battalion, Wiesbaden, Germany; and vessel platoon leader/company executive officer, 598th Transportation Company, 6th Transportation Battalion at Fort Eustis, Va.  

Additionally, Whittacre’s experience includes seven deployments in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Inherent Resolve, and Operation Freedom Sentinel.  

Whittacre’s awards and decorations include the Bronze Star Medal, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Meritorious Service Medal, Army Commendation Medal, Army Achievement Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Iraqi Campaign Medal, Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary and Service Medals, Korean Defense Service Medal, Non-Commissioned Officer Professional Development Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, Combat Action Badge, Parachutist Badge, and Air Assault Badge.
September 1

st 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Exemption Request Under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and

Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform Act”)

and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Terra Imaging LLC (“Terra Imaging”), operators of Unmanned Aircraft

System (“UAS”), seeks an amendment to our Exemption No. 11806 within Regulatory Docket

No. FAA­2015­0386

The additional aircraft requested are the following Unmanned Aerial Systems:

DJI Phantom Series 1, 2 and 3

DJI Inspire Series 1 and 2

DJI Matrice

DJI S800

DJI S900

3DR SOLO

3DR X8

Freefly Alta

Terra Imaging’s existing safety standards and procedures as outlined in our Flight Operation &

Procedures Manual will continue for the additional aircraft. We will follow the recommended

Maintenance and operations parameters set forth by all systems manufacturers. Please see

attached the Operations Manual, Maintenance Manual, and the updated UAS Systems

Specification documents. Please feel free to contact us directly if you require additional

information.

Sincerely,

Karl Engstrom – President and CEO

Terra Imaging LLC

Telluride, CO – USA

www.terraimaging.com
No. 09-11529.

#### Julio Eliezer Ortiz, Sr., Petitioner v. Jeffrey A. Beard, Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, et al.

562 U.S. 1125, 131 S. Ct. 852,

178 L. Ed. 2d 582,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9598.

December 13, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 886, 131 S. Ct. 216, 178 L. Ed. 2d 130, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 7013.
# C_2016027EN.01003701.xml

| 25.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 November 2015 — Comunidad Autónoma de Galicia and Retegal v Commission

(Joined Cases T-463/13 and T-464/13) (1)

1

((State aid - Digital television - Aid for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas in Spain - Decision declaring aid to be partly compatible and partly incompatible with the internal market - Concept of undertaking - Economic activity - Advantage - Service of general economic interest - Selective nature - Article 107(3)(c) TFEU - Obligation to state reasons))

(2016/C 027/43)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Comunidad Autónoma de Galicia (Spain) (represented by: M. Lorenzo Outón and P. Egerique Mosquera, lawyers) (Case T-463/13); and Redes de Telecomunicación Galegas Retegal SA (Retegal) (Santiago de Compostela, Spain) (represented by: F. García Martínez and B. Pérez Conde, lawyers) (Case T-464/13)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier, B. Stromsky and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: SES Astra (Betzdorf, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. González Díaz, F. Salerno and in Case T-463/13, V. Romero Algarra, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2014/489/EU of 19 June 2013 on State aid SA.28599 [(C 23/2010) (ex NN 36/010, ex CP 163/2009)] implemented by the Kingdom of Spain for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas (other than Castilla-La Mancha) (OJ 2014 L 217, p. 52).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action;

| 2) | Orders Comunidad Autónoma de Galicia (Spain) and Redes de Telecomunicación Galegas Retegal, SA (Retegal) to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and by SES Astra. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Comunidad Autónoma de Galicia (Spain) and Redes de Telecomunicación Galegas Retegal, SA (Retegal) to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission and by SES Astra.

---

(1)  OJ C 304, 19.10.2013.

1

---
#### Neil Werner, Appellant, v Michele Werner, Respondent.

[60 NYS3d 330]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Marlene L. Budd, J.), dated April 13, 2015. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied that branch of the plaintiff’s cross motion which was to terminate his support obligation with respect to the parties’ daughter on the ground of constructive emancipation.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, the Supreme Court properly determined that his child support obligation with respect to the parties’ daughter was not terminated on the ground of constructive emancipation. “ ‘It is fundamental public policy in New York that parents are responsible for their children’s support until age 21’ ” *(Matter of Jurgielewicz v Johnston,*114 AD3d 945, 945 [2014], quoting *Matter of Gold v Fisher,*59 AD3d 443, 444 [2009]; *see*Family Ct Act § 413; *Matter of Barlow v Barlow,*112 AD3d 817 [2013]; *Matter of Gansky v Gansky,*103 AD3d 894 [2013]; *Schulman v Schulman,*101 AD3d 1098 [2012]; *Matter of Glen L.S. v Deborah A.S.,*89 AD3d 856, 857 [2011]). “ ‘However, under the doctrine of constructive emancipation, a child of employable age who actively abandons the noncustodial parent by refusing all contact and visitation may forfeit any entitlement to support. A child’s . . . reluctance to see a parent is not abandonment’ ” *(Matter of Jurgielewicz v Johnston,*114 AD3d at 945, quoting *Matter of Barlow v Barlow,*112 AD3d at 818; *see Matter of Grucci v Villanti,*108 AD3d 626 [2013]; *Schulman v Schulman,*101 AD3d at 1099; *Matter of Turnow v Stabile,*84 AD3d 1385 [2011]). Here, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate, prima facie, that his daughter had refused all contact and visitation. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the plaintiff’s cross motion which was to terminate his support obligation with respect to his daughter on the ground of constructive emancipation.

*760The plaintiffs contention that the Supreme Court should not have denied his cross motion without a hearing is without merit. The plaintiff did not request such a hearing or object to the submission of the issue based on papers, and thus, he waived that right *(see Mollah v Mollah,*136 AD3d 992, 994 [2016]; *Bandler v Bandler,*58 AD3d 775, 776 [2009]; *Pascazi v Pascazi,*52 AD3d 664, 665 [2008]; *Messinger v Messinger,*24 AD3d 631, 632 [2005]).

The plaintiff did not did not contest the amount of college expenses sought by the defendant, and therefore, he may not raise this issue for the first time on appeal *(see Wexelbaum v Jean,*80 AD3d 756, 757 [2011]; *Willsey v Gjuraj,*65 AD3d 1228, 1231 [2009]; *Green Apple Mgt. Corp. v Aronis,*55 AD3d 669 [2008]).

Chambers, J.P., Miller, Hinds-Radix and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit
        13.1**
  **CERTIFICATION**
  Pursuant
        to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
        adopted), Peter A. J. Gardiner, the Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors
        of Zindart Limited (the “Company”), and Ken Fowler, the Chief Financial Officer
        of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his
        knowledge:
  1.  The
        Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2005, to which
        this Certification is attached as Exhibit 13.1 (the “Annual Report”), fully
        complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the
        Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
  2.  The
        information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
        respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period
        covered by the Annual Report and results of operations of the Company for
        the
        period covered by the Annual Report.
  
  
  /s/PETER
                  A.J. GARDINER|
              
              /s/KEN
                  FOWLERPeter
                  A. J. Gardiner
              
              Ken
                  Fowler*Executive
                  Chairman of the Board of Directors*
              
              *Chief
                  Financial Officer*Dated:
                  July 11, 2005
              
              Dated:
                  July 11, 2005
No. 10-7437.

#### James Louis Polk, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1116, 131 S. Ct. 840,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9772.

178 L. Ed. 2d 571,

December 13, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 381 Fed. Appx. 385.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.01

                              THE BANC CORPORATION
                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of The Banc Corporation
(the "Company") certifies that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q of the Company for the Quarter ended June 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: August 9, 2004                       /s/ James A. Taylor
                                            -------------------
                                                James A. Taylor
                                                Chief Executive Officer

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.
# C_2015213EN.01003001.xml

| 29.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 May 2015 — Group Nivelles v OHIM — Easy Sanitary Solutions (Shower drain conduit)

(Case T-15/13) (1)

1

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered design representing a shower drain conduit - Earlier design - Grounds for invalidity - Novelty - Individual character - Visible characteristic of the earlier design - Goods at issue - Articles 4 to 7, 19 and 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))

(2015/C 213/51)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Group Nivelles (Gingelom, Belgium) (represented by: H. Jonkhout, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: S. Bonne and A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court: Easy Sanitary Solutions BV (Losser, Netherlands) (represented by: F. Eijsvogels, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 October 2012 (Case R 2004/2010-3) concerning invalidity proceedings between I-drain BVBA and Easy Sanitary Solutions BV.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 4 October 2012 (Case R 2004/2010-3); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 4 October 2012 (Case R 2004/2010-3);

| 2. | Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the remainder of the action;

| 3. | Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Group Nivelles and Easy Sanitary Solutions BV. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Group Nivelles and Easy Sanitary Solutions BV.

---

(1)  OJ C 108, 13.4.2013.

1

---
No. 10-7055.

#### Kevin Rendon, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1052, 131 S. Ct. 620,

178 L. Ed. 2d 450,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8836.

November 15, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 607 F.3d 982.
No. 10-5780.

#### Solomon Ben-Tov Cohen, Petitioner v. Theresa Hunt, Warden.

562 U.S. 1088, 131 S. Ct. 697,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9229.

178 L. Ed. 2d 526,

November 29, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

*527Former decision, 562 U.S. 937, 131 S. Ct. 345, 178 L. Ed. 2d 224, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 7401.
#### Paul Mastronardi, Respondent, v Countywide Construction Corp., Appellant.

[767 NYS2d 802]—

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Costello, J.), dated September 4, 2002, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 6512 and 6514 (a) to cancel the notice of pendency filed on January 17, 2002.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the notice of pendency filed on January 17, 2002, is cancelled.

It is undisputed that in a prior action regarding the same contract, the complaint was dismissed as against the defendant herein on the basis of improper service of process, and the notice of pendency filed in relation to that action was cancelled. Thus, the plaintiff failed in the prior action to strictly comply with the requirement of CPLR 6512 that service of the summons be effected within 30 days of the filing of the notice of pendency. In light of that failure to comply with CPLR 6512, the second notice of pendency, filed on January 17, 2002, in the instant action, cannot be permitted to stand *(see Weiner v MKVII-Westchester,*292 AD2d 597, 599 [2002]; *Chiulli v Cross Westchester Dev. Corp.,*134 AD2d 559 [1987]; *Gargano v Rubin,*130 AD2d 709, 710 [1987]; *Holiday Invs. Corp. v Breger & Co., 112*AD2d 979 [1985]). Santucci, J.P., Luciano, Schmidt and Adams, JJ., concur.
**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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Duckwall-Alco Stores, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended January 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby 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, 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. |

 

 

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

 
| Date: April 15, 2011 |   |
|---------------------------|--------|
|                      | By:    | /s/ Wayne S. Peterson |
|                      |   | Wayne S. Peterson |
|                      |   | SVP — Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Exhibit 99.2




                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


In connection with the Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. (the "Company") Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Stanford R. Ovshinsky, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge,

   1.    The Report 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.


Date:   September 30, 2002                  By:  /s/ Stanford R. Ovshinsky
                                                 ------------------------------
                                                 Stanford R. Ovshinsky
                                                 Chief Executive Officer









                                       156