alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022198EN.01000902.xml

| 16.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 198/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 198/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 24 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Galapagos BidCo. Sàrl v DE, in its capacity as liquidator of Galapagos SA, Hauck Aufhäuser Fund Services SA, Prime Capital SA

(Case C-723/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EU) 2015/848 - Insolvency proceedings - Article 3(1) - International jurisdiction - Moving of the centre of a debtor’s main interests to another Member State after a request to open main insolvency proceedings has been lodged)

(2022/C 198/13)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Galapagos BidCo. Sàrl

Defendants: DE, in its capacity as liquidator of Galapagos SA, Hauck Aufhäuser Fund Services SA, Prime Capital SA

Operative part of the judgment

Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings must be interpreted as meaning that the court of a Member State with which a request to open main insolvency proceedings has been lodged retains exclusive jurisdiction to open such proceedings where the centre of the debtor’s main interests is moved to another Member State after that request has been lodged, but before that court has delivered a decision on it. Consequently, in so far as that regulation is still applicable to that request, the court of another Member State with which another request is lodged subsequently for the same purpose cannot, in principle, declare that it has jurisdiction to open main insolvency proceedings until the first court has delivered its decision and declined jurisdiction.

---

(1)  OJ C 128, 12.4.2021.

---
Buddy Lee CURRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5175

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 14, 2019

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Rowe, Ray, and Osterhaus, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 10.5

                                  R. W. G. INC.
                               6601 Windy Hill Way
                                 Reno, NV 89511



                              ENGAGEMENT AGREEMENT


This agreement, dated July 1, 2001, between SulphCo, Inc. a Nevada Corporation
and R.W.G. INC. a Nevada Corporation, is to set forth the conditions for the
engagement of the services of Dr. R. W. Gunnerman, President and CEO of R.W.G.
Inc. to the Corporation and its shareholders.

Description of Services: Dr. Gunnerman will be responsible for the functions of
the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board.

Service Fees:  SulphCo will pay a yearly fee of $250,000.

Agreement Term: This agreement will terminate after one year, on July 1, 2002




Signed \S\ P.C. KNAUFF                      Signed \S\ RUDOLF W. GUNNERMAN
       ---------------                             -----------------------
P.C. Knauff, Chief Financial Officer        Dr. R. W. Gunnerman, CEO & Chairman
SulphCo, Inc.                               R.W.G. Inc.
Exhibit 4.13


 


SIXTH AMENDMENT TO  SEGUE SOFTWARE, INC. 

1996 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN


 


D.                                    The
SEGUE SOFTWARE, INC. 1996 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN (the “Plan”), is hereby
amended as follows:


 


2.                                       In
Section 12 by deleting the entire subparagraph (a) and inserting in place
thereof the following subparagraph:


 


“(a)                            The maximum number of
shares of the Company’s Common Stock which shall be made available for sale
under the Plan shall be 900,000 shares, subject to adjustment upon changes in
capitalization of the Company as provided in paragraph 18.  If the total number of shares which would
otherwise be subject to options granted pursuant to Section 7(a) hereof on
the Offering Date of an Offering Period exceeds the number of shares then
available under the Plan (after deduction of all shares for which options have
been exercised or are then outstanding), the Company shall make a pro rata
allocation of the shares remaining available for option grant in as uniform a
manner as shall be practicable and as it shall determine to be equitable.  Any amounts remaining in an Employee’s
account not applied to the purchase of stock pursuant to this Section 12
shall be refunded on or promptly after the Exercise Date.  In such event, the Company shall give
written notice of such reduction of the number of shares subject to the option
to each Employee affected thereby and shall similarly reduce the rate of
Contributions, if necessary.”


 


E.                                      The
effective date of this Sixth Amendment shall be June 7, 2004.


 


F.                                      Except
as expressly amended hereby, the Plan remains in full force and effect in
accordance with its terms.
# C_2021513EN.01002501.xml

| 20.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 513/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 513/25

---

Order of the President of the Court of 24 September 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Social No 1 de Barcelona — Spain) — HV v Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (INSS)

(Case C-258/20) (1)

(2021/C 513/35)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.

---
**Exhibit
      23.1**








**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
      Smart
      Online, Inc. on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-124569) and related prospectuses of our
      audit
      report dated March 28, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial
      statements of Smart Online, Inc., which report appears in the Annual Report
      on
      Form 10-K of Smart Online, Inc. for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005
      and
      2004.











/s/
      Sherb
& Co., LLP


Certified
      Public Accountants


New
      York,
      New York





March
      28,
      2007
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 11

- 00356

- CV

SHEILA NANCE APPELLANT

V.

BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY APPELLEE

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

FROM THE 141ST DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

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

We have considered appellant 's “ Agreed Motion To Dismiss Appeal .” It is

the court = s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

Costs of the appeal shall be paid by the party incurring the same, for which

let execution issue. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and DAUPHINOT, J.

DELIVERED: November 23 , 2011
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): July 27, 2006
 US AIRWAYS GROUP, INC.
  Delaware
    
    1-8444
    
    54-1194634(State of jurisdiction)
    
    (Commission File No.)
    
    (IRS Employer Identification No.)
 
  US AIRWAYS, INC.
  Delaware
    
    1-8442
    
    53-0218143(State of jurisdiction)
    
    (Commission File No.)
    
    (IRS Employer Identification No.)
 
  AMERICA WEST AIRLINES, INC.
  Delaware
    
    0-12337
    
    86-0418245(State of jurisdiction)
    
    (Commission File No.)
    
    (IRS Employer Identification No.)
 
   o
 o
 o
 o




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  ITEM 2.02. RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL CONDITIONITEM 9.01. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITSSIGNATURESEXHIBIT INDEXExhibit 99.1    Table of Contents  
 ITEM 2.02. RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND FINANCIAL CONDITION.
  
 ITEM 9.01. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS.
 (c) Exhibits.
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description99.1

    
    Press Release, dated July 27, 2006.




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURES
  US Airways Group, Inc.Dated:  July 27, 2006
    By:
    /s/ Derek J. KerrDerek J. KerrSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer  US Airways, Inc.Dated:  July 27, 2006
    By:
    /s/ Derek J. KerrDerek J. KerrSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer  America West Airlines, Inc.Dated:  July 27, 2006
    By:
    /s/ Derek J. KerrDerek J. KerrSenior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer




---



##### Table of Contents



EXHIBIT INDEX
 Exhibit No.
    
    Description99.1
    
    Press Release, dated July 27, 2006.
# C_2021349EN.01000802.xml

| 30.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 349/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 349/8

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 July 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 2 de Madrid — Spain) — RH v AB Volvo, Volvo Group Trucks Central Europe GmbH, Volvo Lastvagnar AB, Volvo Group España SA

(Case C-30/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 7(2) - Jurisdiction in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict - Place where the damage occurred - Cartel declared contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area - Determination of international and territorial jurisdiction - Centralisation of jurisdiction in favour of a specialised court)

(2021/C 349/10)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 2 de Madrid

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: RH

Defendants: AB Volvo, Volvo Group Trucks Central Europe GmbH, Volvo Lastvagnar AB, Volvo Group España SA

Operative part of the judgment

Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, within the market affected by collusive arrangements on the fixing and increase in the prices of goods, either the court within whose jurisdiction the undertaking claiming to be harmed purchased the goods affected by those arrangements or, in the case of purchases made by that undertaking in several places, the court within whose jurisdiction that undertaking’s registered office is situated, has international and territorial jurisdiction, in terms of the place where the damage occurred, over an action for compensation for the damage caused by those arrangements contrary to Article 101 TFEU.

---

(1)  OJ C 161, 11.5.2020.

---
Exhibit
      32.1


**CERTIFICATE
      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 Quarterly Report of WGNB Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
      for the period ending March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
      Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, H. B. Lipham, III, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
      adopted pursuant to §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; 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:
      May
      15, 2008




/s/ 
                H.B. Lipham, IIIH.B.
                Lipham, IIIChief
                Executive Officer(Principal
                Executive Officer)
**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





The
      undersigned hereby certifies that, to his or her knowledge, (i) the Annual
      Report on Form 10-K filed by Smart Online, Inc. (the "Issuer") for the fiscal
      year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Report"), fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
      and (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Issuer on the dates and for the periods presented therein.










Date:
                July 11, 2006By:
            /s/
                Nicholas SinigliaNicholas
                SinigagliaChief
                Financial Officer





This
      Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed "filed" by the Issuer for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not
      be
      incorporated by reference into any filing of the Issuer under the Securities
      Act
      of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether
      made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any general
      incorporation language contained in such filing.





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 has been provided to the Issuer and will be retained by the Issuer
      and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

May 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

132882 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. JOHN VANDE LUYSTER, as Stephen J. Markman, Personal Representative of the Justices Estate of Angelyn Vande Luyster, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 132882 COA: 257046 Ottawa CC: 02-042262-NH BARTHOLOMEW D. SAK, M.D. and DONALD M. FIX, M.D., Defendants-Appellees,

and

HOLLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, Defendant.

________________ _______________ __________/

By order of November 29, 2007, the app lication for leave to appeal the November 28, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals wa s held in abeyance pending the decision in
Braverman v Garden City Hospital (Docket Nos. 134445-6). On order of the Court, the case having been decided on April 9, 2008, 480 Mich 1159 (2008), the application is again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302 (G)(1), in lieu of gran ting leave to appeal, we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals and REMAND this case to the
Ottawa Circuit Court for reinstatement of the co mplaint. The plainti ff is within the class of plaintiffs identified in this Court's order in Mullins v St Joseph Mercy Hosp , 480 Mich 948 (2007). Furthermore, as noted in Braverman

, supra , the decision in Lindsey v Harper Hospital , 455 Mich 56 (1997), is no longer controlling; thus, the plaintiff had an additional two years in whic h to file the complaint.

l0519 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 27, 2008

Clerk
T.S.C., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1552

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 30, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 12617]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to an agreement with their foreign owner or custodian for temporary display in the exhibition “Edvard Munch: Technically Speaking” at the Harvard Art Museums, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

      ( print page 105675)    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 2021.                

Nicole L. Elkon,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2024-30946 Filed 12-26-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
# C_2022171EN.01000601.xml

| 25.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 10 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — ‘Grossmania’ Mezőgazdasági Termelő és Szolgáltató Kft. v Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal

(Case C-177/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Principles of EU law - Primacy - Direct effect - Sincere cooperation - Article 4(3) TEU - Article 63 TFEU - Obligations of a Member State as a result of a preliminary ruling - Interpretation of a provision of EU law given by the Court in a preliminary ruling - Obligation to give full effect to EU law - Obligation for a national court to disapply national legislation which contravenes EU law as interpreted by the Court - Administrative decision which became final in the absence of a challenge before the courts - Principles of equivalence and effectiveness - Liability of the Member State)

(2022/C 171/07)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Győri Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant:‘Grossmania’ Mezőgazdasági Termelő és Szolgáltató Kft.

Defendant: Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal

Operative part of the judgment

EU law, in particular Article 4(3) TEU and Article 267 TFEU, must be interpreted as meaning that a national court hearing an action against a decision rejecting a request for reinstatement of rights of usufruct which have been extinguished by operation of law and deleted from the land register pursuant to national legislation which is incompatible with Article 63 TFEU, as interpreted by the Court in a preliminary ruling, is required:

| — | to disapply that legislation; and |
| --- | --- |

—

to disapply that legislation; and

| — | in the absence of objective and legitimate obstacles, in particular those of a legal nature, to order the competent administrative authority to reinstate the rights of usufruct, even though the deletion of those rights has not been contested before the courts within the legal time limits and has consequently become final in accordance with national law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in the absence of objective and legitimate obstacles, in particular those of a legal nature, to order the competent administrative authority to reinstate the rights of usufruct, even though the deletion of those rights has not been contested before the courts within the legal time limits and has consequently become final in accordance with national law.

---

(1)  OJ C 279, 24.8.2020.

---