alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020297EN.01002802.xml

| 7.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/28

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 10 June 2020 — Gtflix Tv v DR

(Case C-251/20)

(2020/C 297/38)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Gtflix Tv

Defendant: DR

Question referred

Must Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (1) be interpreted as meaning that a person who, considering that his or her rights have been infringed by the dissemination of derogatory comments on the internet, brings proceedings not only for the rectification of information and the removal of content but also for compensation for the resulting non-material and material damage, may claim, before the courts of each Member State in the territory of which content published online is or was accessible, compensation for the damage caused in the territory of that Member State, in accordance with the judgment in eDate Advertising (paragraphs 51 and 52) [judgment of the Court of 25 October 2011, Joined Cases C-509/09 and C-161/10], or whether, pursuant to the judgment in Svensk Handel (paragraph 48) [judgment of the Court of 17 October 2017, Case C-194/16], that person must make the application for compensation before the court with jurisdiction to order rectification of the information and removal of the derogatory comments?

---

(1)  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 (OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1).

---
Neelam T. UPPAL, Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Appellee.

Case Nos. 2D16-810 2D16-1022 CONSOLIDATED

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed July 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
----

| ─   | the      inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F and the incorporation by      reference in the Registration Statement on Form F-10 (File No. 333-151538)      of our auditors' report dated March 25, 2010 on the consolidated balance      sheets of Enterra Energy Trust ("the Trust") as at December 31, 2009 and      2008, and the consolidated statements of income (loss) and comprehensive      income (loss), deficit and cash flows for each the years then      ended; |
|---------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ─   | the      inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F and the incorporation by      reference in the Registration Statement on Form F-10 (File No. 333-151538)      of our auditors’ report dated March 25, 2010 on the reconciliation of the      consolidated financial statements to United States generally accepted      accounting principles; and |
|---------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| ─   | the      inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of our Report of Independent      Registered Public Accounting Firm dated March 25, 2010 on the      effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December      31, 2009. |
|---------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
# C_2021035EN.01002402.xml

| 1.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/24

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 19 October 2020 — OE v VY

(Case C-522/20)

(2021/C 35/36)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: OE

Defendant: VY

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the sixth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (1) of 27 November 2003 infringe the prohibition of discrimination in Article 18 TFEU on the ground that it provides, as a precondition to the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of residence, depending on the nationality of the applicant, for a shorter period of residence than the fifth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the sixth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (1) of 27 November 2003 infringe the prohibition of discrimination in Article 18 TFEU on the ground that it provides, as a precondition to the jurisdiction of the courts of the State of residence, depending on the nationality of the applicant, for a shorter period of residence than the fifth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003?

| 2. | If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative:
  Does that infringement of the prohibition of discrimination mean that, based on the fundamental rule laid down in the fifth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003, a period of residence of 12 months is required for all applicants, irrespective of their nationality, in order to rely upon the jurisdiction of the courts in the place of residence or is it to be assumed that a period of 6 months’ residence is the precondition for all applicants? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative:

Does that infringement of the prohibition of discrimination mean that, based on the fundamental rule laid down in the fifth indent of Article 3(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003, a period of residence of 12 months is required for all applicants, irrespective of their nationality, in order to rely upon the jurisdiction of the courts in the place of residence or is it to be assumed that a period of 6 months’ residence is the precondition for all applicants?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (OJ 2003 L 338, p. 1).

---
# C_2021278EN.01002501.xml

| 12.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/25

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Neamţ (Romania) lodged on 3 November 2020 — Ministerul Public — D.N.A. — Serviciul Teritorial Bacău v XXX and YYY

(Case C-580/20)

(2021/C 278/35)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Neamţ

Parties to the main proceedings

Accused persons: XXX and YYY

Other party to the proceedings: Ministerul Public — D.N.A. — Serviciul Teritorial Bacău

By order of 11 May 2021, the Court (Sixth Chamber) declared that the request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Neamţ (Regional Court, Neamţ, Romania), made by decision of 14 October 2020, is manifestly inadmissible.

---
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 Trycera Financial, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2006,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), the undersigned principal executive officer of the Company,
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; 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:  Novmeber 14, 2006


/S/ Matthew S. Kerper
-------------------------------
Matthew S. Kerper, President
(Principal executive officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

Respondent/Plaintiff, )

vs. ) No. 3:03-CR-0188-N

) No. 3:05-CV-1488-N (BH)

ORALIA MICHELLE HINOJOSA, ) ECF

ID # 30816-177, ) 

 )

Movant/Defendant. )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and any objections thereto, in

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the

Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings

and Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED December 20, 2007.

 

DAVID C. GODBEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; NIAID Clinical Trial Implementation Cooperative Agreement (U01 Clinical Trial Required).                    

*Date:*                         February 7, 2025.                    

*Time:*                         10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20892 (Video Assisted Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Stephen A. Gallo, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, MSC 9834, Rockville, MD 20852, (240) 669-2858,                         *steve.gallo@nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: January 2, 2025.

Victoria E. Townsend,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2025-00103 Filed 1-6-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
James LUNDGREN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3303

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed March 15, 2019

James Lundgren, Zephyrhills, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the dismissal of Appellant's petition for writ of mandamus seeking records pursuant to section 119.07, Florida Statutes (2018), because Appellant's argument on appeal necessarily relies on subsequent facts that were not raised in the petition below. Our affirmance is therefore without prejudice.

AFFIRMED, without prejudice.

EDWARDS, EISNAUGLE and SASSO, JJ., concur.
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND REQUEST FOR SERVICE OF PAPERS PAGE 1 OF 1

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

IN RE § CHAPTER 7

TRINITY DESIGN & BUILD, LLC,

§

Debtor, § CASE NO. 24-43632-7

Notice of Appearance and Request for Service of Papers

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE of the appearance of Nicholas H. Shahbazi and Herrin Law, 

PLLC as counsel for Trinity Design & Build, LLC, Debtor in this bankruptcy case who requests 

notice of all matters and pleadings in this case. 

Date: October 28, 2024

Respectfully submitted,

HERRIN LAW, PLLC

By: /s/ Nicholas H. Shahbazi

Nicholas H. Shahbazi

Texas Bar No. 24126819

Email: nick@herrinlaw.com

C. Daniel Herrin

Texas Bar No. 24065409

Email: dherrin@herrinlaw.com

12001 N. Central Expy., Suite 920

Dallas, Texas 75243

Tel. (469) 607-8551

Fax. (214) 722-0271

ATTORNEYS FOR DEBTOR

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that, on October 28, 2024, a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing document was served upon all parties entitled to receive notices through the Court’s 

electronic notification system. 

/s/ Nicholas H. Shahbazi

Nicholas H. Shahbazi

Case 24-43632-elm7 Doc 7 Filed 10/28/24 Entered 10/28/24 15:55:45 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 1
**EXHIBIT
31.1**
  Certification
Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  I, H.
David Ramm, Interim President & Chief Executive Officer of Millennium Cell
Inc., certify that:
 
 1. I have
reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Millennium Cell Inc.;
 
 2. Based on my
knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light
of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report;
 
 3. Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the
periods presented in this report;
 
 4. The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and have:
 
 (a)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 
 (b)
[intentionally omitted];
 
 (c)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 (d)
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5. The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
 
 (b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting.
 
 
 Date:
March 21, 2005
 
 /s/ H.
David Ramm
 H. David
Ramm
 Interim
President & Chief Executive Officer
# C_2021079EN.01003803.xml

| 8.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/38

---

Order of the General Court of 20 January 2021 — JD v EIB

(Case T-608/20) (1)

(2021/C 79/50)

Language of the case: English

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

---

(1)  OJ C 433, 14.12.2020.

---
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 19

- 12400 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 2:98

- cr - 00006

- LSC

- TMP

- 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus MARIO ANTON LEE, Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama

________________________ ( April 22, 2020 ) Before JORDAN, BRANCH, and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: Mario Lee, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the District Court’s order granting Lee’s uncontested motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18

Case: 19-12400 Date Filed: 04/22/2020 Page: 1 of 32 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). The Government has moved for summary affirmance of the District Court’s order. Summary disposition is appropriate where “the position of one of the parties is clearly right as a matter of law so that there can be no substantial question as to the outcome of the case.” Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis , 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969). 1 Here, while Lee appealed the District Court’s order reducing his sentence, his argument s on appeal do not pertain to that order, but instead request habeas corpus relief and ask the Court to vacate his sentence. Lee, in 2001, already filed a mot ion to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which the District Court denied, and Lee was denied a certificate of probable cause to appeal to this Court. 2 Any further request for habeas corpus relief would be deemed second or successive and w ould require leave of this Court, which Lee has not requested or received. 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h). To the extent that Lee is challenging the District Court’s order reducing his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), we grant the Government’s motion for summary affirmance because Lee has presented no argument in support of this challenge. To the e xtent that Lee is contesting the legality of his conviction and

1 A ll decisions of the former Fifth Circuit announced before October 1, 1981, are binding precedent in the Eleventh Circuit. Bonner v. City of Prichard , 661 F.2d 1206, 12 09 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc). 2 Lee later petitioned the District Court for a writ of coram nobis, which the District Court denied and this Court affirmed.

Case: 19-12400 Date Filed: 04/22/2020 Page: 2 of 33 sentence and attempting to relitigate issues presented in his previous § 2255 motion without leave of this Court , we are without jurisdiction to entertain these arguments and they must be dism issed. DISMISSED IN PART AND AFFIRMED IN PART. Case: 19-12400 Date Filed: 04/22/2020 Page: 3 of 3
Research, Engineering and Development Advisory Committee

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

FAA Headquarters, 

800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC.

MacCracken/Huerta Collab. Ctr. FOB 10A, 10th Floor

October 10, 2019

Agenda

Time Topic Presenter(s)

9:00 am Welcome Address and Opening Remarks John Hansman

Shelley Yak

9:15 am FAA Administrator Address Steve Dickson

9:30 am FAA Research and Development Landscape Update Steve Summer

10:00 am FAA UAS Update Jay Merkle

Sabrina SaundersHodge

10:30 am Break

10:45 am Subcommittee Report – Environment and Energy Ian Redhead

11:15 am Subcommittee Report – NAS Operations Leo Prusak

11:45 am Lunch

12:45 pm Subcommittee Report – Airport Chris Oswald

1:15 pm Subcommittee Report – Human Factors Barbara Holder

1:45 pm Subcommittee Report – Aircraft Safety Terry McVenes

2:15 pm Committee Closing Discussion

 -Findings and Recommendations

 -Future Actions

John Hansman

REDAC Members

3:00 pm Chairperson’s Closing Remarks John Hansman
Bobby Joe DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-3556

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 25, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.