alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022051EN.01001201.xml

| 31.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 2 December 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht München — Germany) — Vodafone Kabel Deutschland GmbH v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V.

(Case C-484/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive (EU) 2015/2366 - Payment services - Article 62(4) - Charges applicable - Article 107(1) - Full harmonisation - Article 115(1) and (2) - Transposition and application - Subscriptions for cable television and internet access - Contracts of indefinite duration concluded before the date for transposition of that directive - Charges applied to payment transactions without direct debit authorisation that are initiated after that date)

(2022/C 51/15)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberlandesgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Vodafone Kabel Deutschland GmbH

Respondent: Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e.V.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 62(4) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on payment services in the internal market, amending Directives 2002/65/EC, 2009/110/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, and repealing Directive 2007/64/EC, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation or a national practice under which, in the context of contracts of indefinite duration concluded with consumers, the prohibition on requesting charges for the use of payment instruments, and for payment services, referred to in Article 62(4) applies only to payment transactions initiated in performance of contracts concluded after 13 January 2018, with the result that such charges remain applicable to payment transactions initiated after that date in performance of contracts of indefinite duration concluded before that date.

---

(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.

---
# C_2022418EN.01000401.xml

| 31.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 418/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 418/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 15 September 2022 — Colin Brown v European Commission, Council of the European Union

(Case C-675/20 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Annex VII to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union - Article 4(1)(a) and (b) - EU official who is a national of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and who during the 10 years before his entry into service habitually resided within the territory of the State in which he is employed - Withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union - Acquisition by that EU official of the nationality of the State in which he is employed - Withdrawal of the entitlement to receive an expatriation allowance - Action for annulment)

(2022/C 418/04)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Colin Brown (represented by: I. Van Damme, advocaat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: T.S. Bohr and D. Milanowska, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Alver and M. Bauer, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Mr Colin Brown to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Colin Brown to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Decides that the Council of the European Union is to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Decides that the Council of the European Union is to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 98, 22.3.2021.

---
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 30, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 18, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1138 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-921, K2025-922.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-31107 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Jason Scott MITCHELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-2014

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 5, 2018

Jason Scott Mitchell, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LAGOA, LOGUE, and SCALES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                        Inrange Technologies Corporation
                             100 Mount Holly By-Pass
                               Lumberton NJ 08048


                                 March 22, 2002


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 5th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20549


Ladies and Gentlemen:

         Pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission Release Nos. 33-8070,
34-45590; 35-27503; 39-2395; IA-2018; IC-25464; FR-62; File No. S7-03-02, this
letter is to confirm that Inrange Technologies Corporation has received
assurance from its independent public accountants, Arthur Andersen LLP ("Arthur
Andersen"), that Arthur Andersen's audit of our consolidated financial
statements as of December 31, 2001 and for the year then ended (the "Audit") was
subject to Arthur Andersen's quality control system for the U.S. accounting and
auditing practice to provide reasonable assurance that the engagement was
conducted in compliance with professional standards, that there was appropriate
continuity of Arthur Andersen personnel working on the Audit, availability of
national office consultation, and availability of personnel at foreign
affiliates of Arthur Andersen to conduct the relevant portions of the Audit.

                                    INRANGE TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION


                                    /s/ John R. Schwab

                                    Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
---

Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,  
as adopted Pursuant to Section 906  
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of American Lorain Corporation (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Yilun Jin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: May 16, 2011

/s/ David She  David She  
Chief Financial Officer

---
Terry Lee FREEZE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Mike CARROLL, Secretary, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4418

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 10, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**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 Interactive Motorsports and Entertainment Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William R. Donaldson, 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, 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; and |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

|              |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
|-------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| November 20, 2006 |   | /s/ William R. Donaldson                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|              |   |   

  

William R. Donaldson Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer 

 

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

 

 

 

  |
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 106628]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31117]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 30, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 18, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Contract 558 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-925, K2025-926.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-31117 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
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 Quarterly Report of United Energy Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB
for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James McKeever,
Interim Chief Financial 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 result of operations of the Company.

|       |                     |     |                      |                                   | 
|------ | ------------------- | --- | -------------------- | --------------------------------- | 
|Dated: | November 13,
  2006 | By: | /s/ James
  McKeever |                                  
|       |                     |     |                      |                                  
|       |                     |     |                      | James
  McKeever                  | 
|       |                     |     |                      | Interim
  Chief Financial Officer



---
<PAGE>


Exhibit 10.8


                                 PROMISSORY NOTE

$12,484.10                                                        March 15, 2004

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, Single Source Electronic Transactions,
Inc., of 11242 Playa Court, Culver City, CA 90230 promises to pay to the order
of Westside Commercial Investments, LLC, of 11242 Playa Court, Culver City, CA
90230, or such other place as the holder may designate in writing to the
undersigned, the principal sum of Twelve Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Four
Dollars and ten cents ($12,484.10), together with interest thereon from date
hereof until paid, at the rate of Eight Percent (8%) per annum as follows: One
payment of principal and interest of Thirteen Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Two
Dollars and eighty two cents ($13,482.82) on March 15, 2005. All or any part of
the aforesaid principal sum may be prepaid at any time and from time to time
without penalty.

In the event of any default by the undersigned in the payment of principal or
interest when due or in the event of the suspension of actual business,
insolvency, assignment for the benefit of creditors, adjudication of bankruptcy,
or appointment of a receiver, of or against the undersigned, the unpaid balance
of the principal sum of this promissory note shall at the option of the holder
become immediately due and payable and the amount then due shall accrue interest
until payment at the rate of ten percent (10%) per annum. In the event of a
default, any payments shall be applied first to accrued interest and the balance
to principal.

The maker and all other persons who may become liable for the payment hereof
severally waive demand, presentment, protest, notice of dishonor or nonpayment,
notice of protest, and any and all lack of diligence or delays in collection
which may occur, and expressly consent and agree to each and any extension or
postponement of time of payment hereof from time to time at or after maturity or
other indulgence, and waive all notice thereof.

In case suit or action is instituted to collect this note, or any portion
hereof, the maker promises to pay such additional sum, as the court may adjudge
reasonable, attorneys' fees in said proceedings.

This note is made and executed under, and is in all respects governed by, the
laws of the State of California. Venue for any action or suit under this
promissory note shall be Los Angeles, California.

Single Source Electronic Transaction, Inc.
By its President,



/s/ Arnold F. Sock
---------------------------
Arnold F. Sock, President
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 5, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00655

- CV

Rosaly CANALES d/b/a Marathon Bulk Transport

,

Appellant

v.

CAPITOL AGGREGATES, INC.

,

Appellee

From the 150th Jud icial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CI05174

Honorable Cathleen M. Stryker, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is hereby MOOT. The

reporter’s record has not been filed. The appellant’s brief is not due until thirty days after the

date the appellate record is complete. Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a).

____________________ _____________ Liz a A. Rodriguez , Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 5th day of November, 2019

.

_______________ ____________________ M ichael A. C ruz

, Clerk of Court
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2634

JANICE L. NORMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusMONTGOMERY COLLEGE; BOARD OF TRUSTEES; AFFIRMATIVE ACTION OFFICE; FRANCIS COATES; DOCTOR GOLDENBERG; BRIANNE FRIEL; WOMEN’S STUDIESPROGRAM; WOMEN’S STUDIES SCHOLARSHIP COMMITTEE, Division of English Department; GEORGE JEFFERSON, at Montgomery College; DISABILITY SUPPORT SERVICES; FINANCIAL AID OFFICE; JOAN GOUGH, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA98-2520-DKC) Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: January 5, 1999 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Janice L. Norman, Appellant Pro Se. Charles Wellington Thompson, Jr., County Attorney, Joanne Robertson, COUNTY ATTORNEY’s OFFICE, Rockville, Maryland; Darrell Robert VanDeusen, Clifford Bernard Geiger, KOLLMAN & SHEEHAN, Baltimore, Maryland; Joan Bossman2 Gordon, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Janice L. Norman appeals the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his complaint alleging a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101-12213 (West 1995). This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994). Because Norman may be able to save this action by amending her complaint, the district court’s order is not an appealable final order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064 (4th Cir. 1993) (a dismissal without prejudice is not reviewable unless the reasons stated for the dismissal clearly disclose that no amendment to the complaint could cure its defects). We therefore dismiss the appeal without prejudice. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
John SCOLES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-1923

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 8, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# C_2020339EN.01000401.xml

| 12.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 339/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 339/4

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 24 July 2020 — Bank Sepah v Overseas Financial Limited, Oaktree Finance Limited

(Case C-340/20)

(2020/C 339/05)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Bank Sepah

Defendants: Overseas Financial Limited, Oaktree Finance Limited

Other party: Procureur général près la Cour de cassation

Questions referred

| 1. | Are Article 1(h) and (j) and Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007, (1) Article 1(i) and (h) and Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (2) and Article 1(k) and (j) and Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 (3) to be interpreted as precluding a measure with no earmarking effect, such as a judicial lien or preventive attachment, provided for in the French Code of Civil Enforcement Proceedings, from being implemented, without prior authorisation from the competent national authority, in respect of frozen assets? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are Article 1(h) and (j) and Article 7(1) of Regulation (EC) No 423/2007, (1) Article 1(i) and (h) and Article 16(1) of Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (2) and Article 1(k) and (j) and Article 23(1) of Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 (3) to be interpreted as precluding a measure with no earmarking effect, such as a judicial lien or preventive attachment, provided for in the French Code of Civil Enforcement Proceedings, from being implemented, without prior authorisation from the competent national authority, in respect of frozen assets?

| 2. | Is it relevant to the answer to the first question that the grounds for the claim to be recovered from the person or entity whose assets are frozen are unrelated to Iran’s nuclear and ballistic programme and pre-date United Nations Security Council Resolution 1737 (2006) of 23 December 2006? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is it relevant to the answer to the first question that the grounds for the claim to be recovered from the person or entity whose assets are frozen are unrelated to Iran’s nuclear and ballistic programme and pre-date United Nations Security Council Resolution 1737 (2006) of 23 December 2006?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 of 19 April 2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2007 L 103, p. 1).

(2)  Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 1).

(3)  Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1).

---