alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016305EN.01000201.xml

| 22.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 June 2016 — SKW Stahl-Metallurgie GmbH, SKW Stahl-Metallurgie Holding AG v European Commission, Gigaset AG

(Case C-154/14 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Article 81 EC - Markets for calcium carbide powder, calcium carbide granulates and magnesium granulates in a substantial part of the European Economic Area - Price fixing, market sharing and exchange of information - Regulation (EC) No 773/2004 - Articles 12 and 14 - Right to be heard - In camera hearing))

(2016/C 305/02)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellants: SKW Stahl-Metallurgie GmbH, SKW Stahl-Metallurgie Holding AG (represented by: A. Birnstiel and S. Janka, Rechtsanwälte)

Appellants:

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: G. Meessen and R. Sauer, acting as Agents, and A. Böhlke, Rechtsanwalt), Gigaset AG, formerly Arques Industries AG

Other parties to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders SKW Stahl-Metallurgie GmbH and SKW Stahl-Metallurgie Holding AG to pay the costs of the European Commission and to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders SKW Stahl-Metallurgie GmbH and SKW Stahl-Metallurgie Holding AG to pay the costs of the European Commission and to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 159, 26.5.2014.

1

---
# C_2016068EN.01000901.xml

| 22.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 23 December 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Rüdiger Hobohm v Benedikt Kampik Ltd & Co. KG, Benedikt Aloysius Kampik, Mar Mediterraneo Werbe- und Vertriebsgesellschaft für Immobilien SL

(Case C-297/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Jurisdiction in respect of consumer contracts - Articles 15(1)(c) and 16(1) - Meaning of a commercial or professional activity ‘directed to’ the Member State of the consumer’s domicile - Transaction-management contract designed to achieve the economic objective pursued by means of a brokerage contract concluded beforehand in the course of a commercial or professional activity ‘directed to’ the Member State of the consumer’s domicile - Close link))

(2016/C 068/11)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Rüdiger Hobohm

Applicant:

Defendants: Benedikt Kampik Ltd & Co. KG, Benedikt Aloysius Kampik, Mar Mediterraneo Werbe- und Vertriebsgesellschaft für Immobilien SL

Defendants:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, read in conjunction with Article 16(1) of that regulation, must, in so far as it relates to the contract concluded in the context of a commercial or professional activity ‘directed’ by the professional ‘to’ the Member State of the consumer’s domicile, be interpreted as meaning that it may be applied to a contract concluded between a consumer and a professional which on its own does not come within the scope of the commercial or professional activity ‘directed’ by that professional ‘to’ the Member State of the consumer’s domicile, but which is closely linked to a contract concluded beforehand by those same parties in the context of such an activity. It is for the national court to determine whether the constituent elements of that link are present, in particular whether the parties to both of those contracts are identical in law or in fact, whether the economic objective of those contracts concerning the same specific subject-matter is identical and whether the second contract complements the first contract in that it seeks to make it possible for the economic objective of that first contract to be achieved.

---

(1)  OJ C 303, 8.9.2014.

1

---
No. 10-6860.

#### Anthony A. Birtha, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1174, 131 S. Ct. 990,

178 L. Ed. 2d 819,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 463.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 1035, 131 S. Ct. 582, 178 L. Ed. 2d 425, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 8770.
EX-4.5



 Exhibit 4.5 
  





 
 To: THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC as Agent 

From: VODAFONE GROUP PLC as Borrower 
 Date:
27 March 2014 
 Vodafone Group Plc - € 4,230,000,000 

Revolving Credit Agreement dated 1 July 2010 (the “Facility Agreement”) 

Irrevocable notice of cancellation 
  

	 	1.	We refer to the Facility Agreement. Terms defined in the Facility Agreement have the same meaning in this cancellation notice. 

  

	 	2.	Vodafone is currently in the process of replacing the Facility Agreement with a new €3,860,000,000 revolving credit agreement (the “New Facility Agreement”), which is due to be entered into on or
about 27 March 2014. 

  

	 	3.	At the date hereof, we confirm that there are no Revolving Credit Advances and/or Swingline Advances outstanding under the Facility Agreement. 


 

	 	4.	Subject to the New Facility Agreement being entered into and having full force and effect, we hereby, pursuant to paragraph (a) of Clause 7.2 (Voluntary cancellation), give you irrevocable notice of the
cancellation of the Total Commitments in full. 

  

	 	5.	Please acknowledge receipt of this notice as soon as possible by returning a countersigned copy to us. 

  

			
	Vodafone Group Plc
	
	/s/Andy Halford
		
	By:	 	Andy Halford
		
	Its:	 	Chief Financial Officer

  

			
	FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND RECEIPT
	
	The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc
	
	/s/Bob Ottewill
		
	By:	 	Bob Ottewill
		
	Its:	 	authorised representative
		
	Date:	 	27/3/ 2014

 Vodafone Group Plc 

Registered Office: Vodafone House, The Connection, Newbury, Berkshire RG14 2FN, England. Registered in England No. 3802001
No. 10-7232.

#### Travis Ray Thompson, Petitioner v. Matthew Cate, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

562 U.S. 1148, 131 S. Ct. 927,

178 L. Ed. 2d 772,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 342.

January 10, 2011.

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

Same case below, 377 Fed. Appx. 639.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

Nos. 04-15-00262-CR, 04-15-00263-CR, & 04-15-00264-CR

Angel H. LONGORIA,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 2014CR9330, 2014CR5599A, & 2104CR5685A

Honorable Mary D. Roman, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, these appeals are DISMISSED.

SIGNED September 9, 2015.

______________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
No. 10-11092.

#### Demetrius Charles Howard, Petitioner v. California.

565 U.S. 866, 132 S. Ct. 213,

181 L. Ed. 2d 116,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6641.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.

Same case below, 51 Cal. 4th 15, 118 Cal. Rptr. 3d 678, 243 P.3d 972.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 17 (Tuesday, January 27, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3834-3835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1891]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-221; RM-9181]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Satellite Beach, FL

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Action in this document allots Channel 253A to Satellite 
Beach, Florida, as that community's first local service in response to 
a petition filed by Satellite Beach Community Broadcasters. See 62 FR 
58937, October 31, 1997. The coordinates for Channel 253A at Satellite 
Beach are 28-10-24 and 80-36-12. With this action, this proceeding is 
terminated. A filing window for Channel 253A at Satellite Beach, 
Florida, will not be opened at this time. Instead, the issue of opening 
a filing window for this channel will be addressed by the Commission in 
a subsequent order.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 2, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order, MM Docket No. 97-221, adopted January 7, 1998, and released 
January 16, 1998. The full text of this Commission decision is 
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the Commission's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW, 
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International 
Transcription Services, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20036, (202) 857-3800, facsimile (202) 857-3805.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.


[[Page 3835]]


    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Florida, is 
amended by adding Satellite Beach and Channel 253A.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 98-1891 Filed 1-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Justo Richards, Appellant.

[54 NYS3d 868]

Application by the appellant for a writ of error coram nobis to vacate, on the ground of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, a decision and order of this Court dated March 3, 1986 *(.People v Richards,*118 AD2d 604 [1986]), affirming a judgment of the Supreme Court, Bungs County, rendered November 20, 1981.

Ordered that the application is denied.

The appellant has failed to establish that he was denied the effective assistance of appellate counsel *(see Jones v Barnes,*463 US 745 [1983]; *People v Stultz,*2 NY3d 277 [2004]).

Rivera, J.P., Leventhal, Austin and Christopher, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mindy Melendez, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 885]

— Appeal from a judgment of Oneida County Court (Dwyer, J.), entered February 22, 2001, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed *(see People v Hidalgo,*91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Pine, Wisner, Hurlbutt and Gorski, JJ.
*DoD 4000.25-7-M, March 2004*

DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

**DIC FB1/FB2/GB1/GB2 FORMAT**

**BILLING FOR DIRECT DELIVERY OF STOCKED ITEMS**

102

	APPENDIX 3.4

1
# **Proposed Defense Logistics Management Standards Change XXXX**

# **Change Title**

**Technical POC:**

**Functional POC:**

**Technical Details:**

**Revised Transaction Flow:**

**Additions or Changes to Data Elements:**

**Automated Information Systems (AIS):**

***Coordination Response Requirement:****PRC Representatives, include, with your response, a list of all systems impacted by this change, including the program office point of contact information (name, phone number, email) for each listed system.*

**Defense Automatic Addressing System (DAAS):**

**Defense Logistics Manual (DLM) 4000.25:**

**Non-DLM 4000.25 Publications:**

***Coordination Response Requirement:****PRC Representatives, include, with your response, a list of additional publications that will require revision as a result of this change.*

Attachment, PDC XXXX

Page 2

Attachment, PDC XXXX

Page 1
**TBS      INTERNATIONAL LIMITED & SUBSIDIARIES **
**EXHIBIT      32**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|  Date:                August 10, 2006  |  /s/                Joseph E.                Royce                                                                                                                                       Joseph                E. RoycePresident                and Chief Executive Officer |
|--------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Date:                August 10, 2006  |  /s/                Ferdinand V.                Lepere                                                                                                     Ferdinand                V. Lepere Senior                Vice President, Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                                |
|  Date:                August 10, 2006       |  /s/                Anthony                Gentile                                                            Anthony                GentileController,                Chief Accounting Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38436-38437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18908]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    Extension: Rule 15Bc3-1; Form MSDW; SEC File No. 270-98; OMB 
Control No. 3235-0087

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC 
20549

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget (``OMB'') a request for approval of extension on the 
following rule: Rule 15Bc3-1.
    Rule 15Bc3-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 provides 
that a notice of withdrawal from registration with the Commission as a 
bank municipal securities dealer must be filed on Form MSDW.
    Approximately 20 respondents will utilize this notice annually, 
with a total burden of 10 hours. The average number of hours necessary 
to comply with the requirements of Rule 15Bc3-1 is .5 hours. The 
average cost per hour is approximately $40. Therefore, the total cost 
of compliance for the respondents is $400.
    Providing the information on the notice is mandatory in order to 
withdraw from registration with the Commission as a bank municipal 
securities dealer. The information contained in the notice will not be 
confidential. An agency may not

[[Page 38437]]

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control 
number.
    General comments regarding the estimated burden hours should be 
directed to the following persons: (i) Deck Officer for the Securities 
and Exchange Commission, Officer of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management and Budget, Room 3208, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, D.C. 20503; and (ii) Michael E. Bartell, 
Associate Executive Director, Office of Information Technology, 
Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20549. Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this 
notice.

    Dated: July 10, 1998.
Margaret H. McFarland,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18908 Filed 7-15-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
No. 10-11260.

#### David Calhoun, Petitioner v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, et al.

565 U.S. 875, 132 S. Ct. 235,

181 L. Ed. 2d 133,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6707.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
**DoD 4000.25-2-M**

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP3.3. APPENDIX 3.3**

**ISSUE**

## 

2

**AP3.3-**

AP3.3-1

APPENDIX 3.3
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the quarterly report of JanusCapital Group Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Gary D. Black, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                   The report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                   The information contained in the report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Gary D. Black       |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Gary D. Black           |   |
| Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

 

Date: May 11, 2009

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to JanusCapital Group Inc. and will be retained by Janus Capital Group Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
lEmRTMENTOF 

-^,si:SPORWiOM • 

)PERAJ10NS • r r r\ 

I 

U S AtRW'AV IT 

lOiaOCT M P 2}SU 

f'-nrni. Aii aaOJi 

450.fi<5T nRM 

AuKiisl 26.2010 

The Honorable Rav LnHood 

Sccrctarj' of Transjwrtatiyii 

U.S. Department of rrati$port4t<ion 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SR 

Washitigton, DC 20590 

Dear Secretary LallotHl; 

US Airways pro\'ides service to many small cDnununities thrcuj^ioul the country, benefiting the 

eoonomics «nd dtizscns of those communitieii. On June 24'''t 2010 we were plt^ased to initiate 

service between the Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport and our largest hub in flhei^otte. N.C. 

The purpose of this ie^er is to support tlie Baton Rouge Medupolilan Aiiport's application for 

Federal fiinding under the Small Community Air Service r>eveIopment Grant program to fund a 

community awareness campaign to build su|^rt for the aiipart and the new US Airways 

Express service to Ctiarlotte. Our Charlotte service has addressed the Baton Rouge at«as need 

for eltem«itive hub service in the East, providing a secortd competitor in tlte market Preliminary 

data supports the community's belief that this new service will positively impact the mailcet 

through improved schedules and capacity, more competitive fares, and reduced leakage to New 

Orleans. 

While the first few montlis of service ate booking within an acceptable range, it h important that 

the passenger load factors continue to improve to reach profitable levels. We agree that the 

implementation of a community awareness campaigiti to promote usage of the Baton Rouge 

M<^ropolitan Airport, particularly the new US Airways service, wilt be beneficial in Iniilding 

support for the airport and US Airways. 

US Airways is committed to working with the Baton Rouge Metropolitan Airport ensure the new 

servkie is successful. 

Grant Application Under tite 2010 Small Community Air Service Development Program OST-2010-0124
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 132 (Friday, July 10, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37373]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18347]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-297-000]


Tuscarora Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

July 6, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 1, 1998, Tuscarora Gas Transmission 
Company (Tuscarora) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Original Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheet, effective 
August 1, 1998.

Second Revised Sheet No. 37A

    Tuscarora states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with 
Order No. 587-G issued April 16, 1998, in Docket No. RM96-1-007. In 
Order No. 587-G the Commission required pipelines (i) to adopt the most 
recent version of the GISB standards by changing all references in 
their tariffs to Version 1.2 and (ii) to comply with the electronic 
communication requirements in new Section 284.10(c)(3)(ii)-(v).
    Tuscarora states that copies of its filing were mailed to all 
affected customers and the state commissions of Nevada, Oregon and 
California.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 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 as 
provided in 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 proceedings. 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.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18347 Filed 7-9-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 018 0 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DOUGLAS BAERTSCH,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including August 2, 2023, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 26 2023

06/26/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0180