alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2021062EN.01003001.xml

| 22.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 62/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 62/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 December 2020 — Voco v EUIPO (Shape of packaging)

(Case T-118/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for a three-dimensional EU trade mark - Shape of packaging - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 62/36)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Voco GmbH (Cuxhaven, Germany) (represented by: C. Spintig and S. Pietzcker, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: R. Cottrell and A. Söder, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2019 (Case R 978/2019-5) concerning an application for registration of a three-dimensional sign consisting of the shape of packaging as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 4 December 2019 (Case R 978/2019-5); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 4 December 2019 (Case R 978/2019-5);

| 2. | Orders EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 129, 20.4.2020.

---
Case 24-41590-elm11 Doc 17 Filed 05/15/24 Entered 05/15/24 17:25:12 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 3
Case 24-41590-elm11 Doc 17 Filed 05/15/24 Entered 05/15/24 17:25:12 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 3
Case 24-41590-elm11 Doc 17 Filed 05/15/24 Entered 05/15/24 17:25:12 Desc Main

Document Page 3 of 3
**Exhibit 16.1**April 14, 2006Securities and Exchange Commission
# C_2020209EN.01001801.xml

| 22.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 31 March 2020 — Kemwater ProChemie s.r.o. v Odvolací finanční ředitelství

(Case C-154/20)

(2020/C 209/24)

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Kemwater ProChemie s.r.o.

Defendant: Odvolací finanční ředitelství

Questions referred

| 1. | Is it compatible with Directive 2006/112/EC (1) for exercise of the right to deduct input value added tax to be conditional on the taxable person fulfilling the obligation to prove that the taxable supply received was made by another specific taxable person? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is it compatible with Directive 2006/112/EC (1) for exercise of the right to deduct input value added tax to be conditional on the taxable person fulfilling the obligation to prove that the taxable supply received was made by another specific taxable person?

| 2. | If the first question is answered in the affirmative and the taxable person fails to fulfil that evidentiary obligation, can the right to deduct input tax be refused without it being established that that taxable person knew or could have known that by acquiring the goods or services in question he was participating in tax fraud? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the first question is answered in the affirmative and the taxable person fails to fulfil that evidentiary obligation, can the right to deduct input tax be refused without it being established that that taxable person knew or could have known that by acquiring the goods or services in question he was participating in tax fraud?

---

(1)  Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1).

---
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 

SEVENTH AMENDMENT TO CREDIT AGREEMENT 

THIS AMENDMENT TO CREDIT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is entered into as of September 1, 2016, by and between CORVEL CORPORATION, a
Delaware corporation (“Borrower”), and WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION (“Bank”). 
 RECITALS 

WHEREAS, Borrower is currently indebted to Bank pursuant to the terms and conditions of that certain Credit Agreement between Borrower and
Bank dated as of May 28, 2009, as amended from time to time (“Credit Agreement”). 
 WHEREAS, Bank and Borrower have agreed to
certain changes in the terms and conditions set forth in the Credit Agreement and have agreed to amend the Credit Agreement to reflect said changes. 

NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree that the
Credit Agreement shall be amended as follows: 
 1. Section 1.1 (a) is hereby amended by deleting “September 1, 2016” as the last
day on which Bank will make advances under the Line of Credit, and by substituting for said date “September 1, 2017,” with such change to be effective upon the execution and delivery to Bank of a promissory note dated as of September 1,
2016 (which promissory note shall replace and be deemed the Line of Credit Note defined in and made pursuant to the Credit Agreement) and all other contracts, instruments and documents required by Bank to evidence such change. 

2. Except as specifically provided herein, all terms and conditions of the Credit Agreement remain in full force and effect, without waiver or
modification. All terms defined in the Credit Agreement shall have the same meaning when used in this Amendment. This Amendment and the Credit Agreement shall be read together, as one document. 

3. Borrower hereby remakes all representations and warranties contained in the Credit Agreement and reaffirms all covenants set forth therein.
Borrower further certifies that as of the date of this Amendment there exists no Event of Default as defined in the Credit Agreement, nor any condition, act or event which with the giving of notice or the passage of time or both would constitute any
such Event of Default. 
 UNDER OREGON LAW, MOST AGREEMENTS, PROMISES AND COMMITMENTS MADE BY BANK CONCERNING LOANS AND OTHER CREDIT EXTENSIONS WHICH
ARE NOT FOR PERSONAL, FAMILY OR HOUSEHOLD PURPOSES OR SECURED SOLELY BY THE BORROWER’S RESIDENCE MUST BE IN WRITING, EXPRESS CONSIDERATION AND BE SIGNED BY BANK TO BE ENFORCEABLE. 

  
 -1- 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be executed as of the day
and year first written above. 
  

									
		 		 		 	WELLS FARGO BANK,
	CORVEL CORPORATION	 		 	NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
					
	By:	 	 /s/ Richard Schweppe
	 		 	By:	 	  

	  
 Title:
	 	  
 Chief Financial Officer
	 		 		 	 DAWN MOORE,
 SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT



  
 -2-
# C_2020433EN.01001801.xml

| 14.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 433/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 433/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 14 August 2020 — Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e. V. v Dr. August Oetker Nahrungsmittel KG

(Case C-388/20)

(2020/C 433/21)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant on a point of law: Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände — Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband e. V.

Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Dr. August Oetker Nahrungsmittel KG

Questions referred

| 1. | Must the second subparagraph of Article 31(3) of the FIR (1) be interpreted as meaning that that article applies solely to foods which require preparation and for which preparation instructions have been provided? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must the second subparagraph of Article 31(3) of the FIR (1) be interpreted as meaning that that article applies solely to foods which require preparation and for which preparation instructions have been provided?

| 2. | If Question 1 is answered in the negative: Does the phrase ‘per 100 g’ in the second subparagraph of Article 33(2) FIR only refer to 100 grams of the product as sold, or does it also — at least additionally — refer to 100 grams of the food after preparation? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If Question 1 is answered in the negative: Does the phrase ‘per 100 g’ in the second subparagraph of Article 33(2) FIR only refer to 100 grams of the product as sold, or does it also — at least additionally — refer to 100 grams of the food after preparation?

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on the provision of food information to consumers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1924/2006 and (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Commission Directive 87/250/EEC, Council Directive 90/496/EEC, Commission Directive 1999/10/EC, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Directives 2002/67/EC and 2008/5/EC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/2004 (OJ 2011 L 304, p. 18).

---
Exhibit 32.1

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 of OraSure Technologies, 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, Douglas A. Michels, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§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.

|                                                        
|--------------------------------------------------------
|                                                        
|/s/ Douglas A. Michels                                  
|Douglas A. Michels President and Chief Executive
Officer

May 7, 2009
OFFICE OF THE STANDING CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE

6851 N.E. Loop 820, Suite 300

North Richland Hills, TX 76180-6608

(817) 770-8500

(817) 498-1362 FAX

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

IN RE: 

CHAPTER 13

WAEL SAMIR FALTS

JUDGE MARK X MULLIN

CASE NUMBER: 24-43547-MXM §

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

MOTION TO DISMISS WITH CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE AND 

NOTICE OF COURT HEARING THEREON

Now comes Tim Truman, Standing Chapter 13 Trustee and files this motion pursuant to Section 1307 (c) of the 

Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rule 9014, and would respectfully show unto the Court as follows: This case should be 

DISMISSED for the following cause: 

DEBTOR

(INELIGIBILITY)

Hearing Date: 

Thursday, December 19, 2024 at 8:30 AM

2. Secured debt exceeds the allowable limit of $1 ,395,875.00 pursuant to Section 109(e).

1. Unsecured debt exceeds the allowable limit $465 ,275.00 pursuant to Section 109(e), and/or

WHEREFORE, your Trustee prays that after notice and hearing, this Chapter 13 case be DISMISSED. 

/s/ Tim Truman

Tim Truman, Trustee/State Bar # 20258000

OFFICE OF THE STANDING CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE

6851 N.E. Loop 820, Suite 300

North Richland Hills, TX 76180-6608

(817) 770-8500

(817) 498-1362 FAX

Case 24-43547-mxm13 Doc 28 Filed 10/29/24 Entered 10/29/24 09:36:43 Desc

Page 1 of 2
24-43547-MXM WAEL SAMIR FALTS

NOTICE OF COURT HEARING TO THE DEBTOR AND DEBTOR'S ATTORNEY OF RECORD:

You are hereby notified of the filing of the foregoing Trustee's Motion to Dismiss with Certification of Service and Notice of 

Court Hearing Thereon. Any written objection or response to the proposed MOTION timely filed with the Court and not 

resolved will be heard by the Court at 8:30 AM, on Thursday, December 19, 2024, Room 128 U.S. Courthouse, 10th and 

Lamar St., Fort Worth, Texas, or by WebEx at: https://us-courts.webex.com/meet/Mullin, Meeting ID: 2310 650 8783 

(for Telephone Dial-In 1-650-479-3207).

THE DEADLINE FOR FILING AN OBJECTION TO THE MOTION TO DISMISS IS ON OR BEFORE Nov 25, 

2024. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ATTEND THE COURT HEARING UNLESS YOU OPPOSE DISMISSAL OF THE 

CASE. ALL PAYMENTS DUE THROUGH THE DATE OF THE COURT HEARING MUST BE PAID CURRENT 

BY THE COURT HEARING DATE IN ORDER FOR THE TRUSTEE TO WITHDRAW THIS MOTION TO 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Trustee's "Motion to Dismiss with Certification of Service and Notice of 

Court Hearing Thereon" have been served on the parties listed below in the manner listed below on or before 10/30/2024.

/s/ Tim Truman

Tim Truman, Trustee/State Bar # 20258000

BY FIRST CLASS MAIL:

WAEL SAMIR FALTS, 19 WYCK HILL LN, ROANOKE, TX 76262-0000

ELECTRONIC SERVICE:

LEINART LAW FIRM, 10670 N CENTRAL EXPWY #320, DALLAS, TX 75231

MCCREARY VESELKA BRAGG & ALLEN, PO BOX 1269, ROUND ROCK, TX 78680

LINEBARGER GOGGAN BLAIR & SAMPSON LLP, 2777 N STEMMONS FWY #1000, DALLAS, TX 75207

AKERMAN, 2001 ROSS AVE #3600, DALLAS, TX 75201

United States Trustee, 1100 COMMERCE STREET, ROOM 976, DALLAS, TX 75242

Case 24-43547-mxm13 Doc 28 Filed 10/29/24 Entered 10/29/24 09:36:43 Desc

Page 2 of 2
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(1)
              - arizona(1)
              - colorado(1)
              - georgia(1)
              - louisiana(1)
              - (-)michigan(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - montana(1)
              - new jersey(1)
              - new mexico(1)
              - new york(1)
              - puerto rico(1)
              - texas(1)
              - virginia(1)
              - wisconsin(2)
              - wyoming(1)

## By Year

              - 2024(1)
              - (-)2023(1)

staff profileThomas L Weaver
Exhibit 32

ORIENT-EXPRESS HOTELS LTD.        Section 1350 Certification

The undersigned hereby certify that this report of Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. for the periods presented fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company as of and for the periods presented in the report.

|/s/J.B. SHERWOODJames B. Sherwood Chairman
(Co-Chief Executive Officer)                |  | /s/S.M.C. SHERWOODSimon M.C. Sherwood President
(Co-Chief Executive Officer)
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/J.G. STRUTHERSJames G. Struthers Vice PresidentFinance and
Chief Financial Officer |  |                                                                             

Dated:
March 4, 2005

[A
signed original of this written certification has been provided to Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. and will be retained by Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. and
furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]

1

---



QuickLinks
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - products_maps(1)
              - products_publications(7)
              - multimedia_image(2)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141775(2)
              - multimedia_video(3)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)
              - multimedia_video-149197(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(1)

## By Location

              - california(2)
              - hawaii(3)
              - (-)massachusetts(2)
              - montana(1)

## By Year

Charts or Graphs        December 31, 2018        Nantucket and Marthas Vineyard geologic illustrations

Charts or Graphs        December 31, 2012        Acoustic Backscatter Intensity
Case 23-20172-rlj7    Doc 294    Filed 07/09/24    Entered 07/09/24 10:46:00    Desc MainDocument      Page 1 of 1
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
136293 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan MICHAEL GEROW, Plaintiff-Appellant, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 136293 COA: 269112 Saginaw CC: 98-025691-CZ CITY OF SAGINAW, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 24, 2008 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

l0716 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.

July 23, 2008

Clerk
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

MICHAEL SNOWDEN,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,

Respondent.

____________________ 

2012-3153

______________________

 

 Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. DC0752100802-B-2.

. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

DAVID A. BRANCH, Law Office of David A. Branch & 

Associates, PLLC, of Washington, DC, argued for petitioner. 

MICHELLE MILBERG, Attorney, Commercial Litigation 

Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of 

Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent. With 

her on the brief were STUART F. DELERY, Principal Deputy 

Assistant Attorney General, JEANNE E. DAVIDSON, Director, and REGINALD T. BLADES, JR., Assistant Director. 

______________________ 
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (RADER, Chief Judge, LOURIE, and 

O'MALLEY, Circuit Judges.). 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

April 8, 2013 /s/ Jan Horbaly 

Date Jan Horbaly

 Clerk
EXHIBIT 23 - CONSENT OF EXPERTS AND COUNSEL.

G. BRAD BECKSTEAD
---------------------------
Certified Public Accountant

330 E. Warm Springs
Las Vegas, NV  89119
702.528.1984
425.928.2877 (efax)

May 7, 2001

To Whom It May Concern:

The firm of G. Brad Beckstead, CPA, consents to the inclusion of my report
of May 7, 2001, on the Financial Statements of Baylor Industries, Inc. for
the three months ending March 31, 2001, in any filings which are necessary
now or in the near future to be filed with the US Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Signed,

/s/ G.Brad Beckstead
------------------------------
G. Brad Beckstead,CPA


<PAGE>
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 1 of 10 PageID 232
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 2 of 10 PageID 233
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 3 of 10 PageID 234
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 4 of 10 PageID 235
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 5 of 10 PageID 236
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 6 of 10 PageID 237
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 7 of 10 PageID 238
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 8 of 10 PageID 239
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 9 of 10 PageID 240
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 39 Filed 10/15/03 Page 10 of 10 PageID 241
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 766 

Recognizing September 17, 2024, as ‘‘National Voter Registration Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 11 (legislative day, JULY 10), 2024 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and Mrs. FISCHER) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing September 17, 2024, as ‘‘National Voter 

Registration Day’’. 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) recognizes September 17, 2024, as ‘‘Na3 tional Voter Registration Day’’; and 

4 (2) encourages each voting-eligible citizen of the 

5 United States— 

6 (A) to register to vote; 

7 (B) to verify with the appropriate State or 

8 local election official that the name, address, 

9 and other personal information on record is 

10 current; and 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 766 ATS 

1 (C) to go to the polls on election day and 

2 vote if the voting-eligible citizen would like to 

3 do so. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 64 

To authorize testimony and representation in United States v. GossJankowski. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 14, 2023 

Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. MCCONNELL) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To authorize testimony and representation in United States 

v. GossJankowski. 

Whereas, in the case of United States v. GossJankowski, Cr. 

No. 21-123, pending in the United States District Court 

for the District of Columbia, the prosecution has requested the production of testimony from Daniel 

Schwager, a former employee of the Office of the Secretary of the Senate; 

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the 

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a) 

and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may direct its counsel to represent current and former officers and employees of the 

Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request 

for evidence relating to their official responsibilities; 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

SRES 64 ATS 

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States 

and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate may, by the judicial or administrative process, be 

taken from such control or possession but by permission 

of the Senate; and 

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or 

in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will take such action as will 

promote the ends of justice consistent with the privileges 

of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That Daniel Schwager, a former employee 

2 of the Office of the Secretary of the Senate, is authorized 

3 to provide relevant testimony in the case of United States 

4 v. GossJankowski, except concerning matters for which a 

5 privilege should be asserted. 

6 SEC. 2. The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to 

7 represent Mr. Schwager, and any current or former officer 

8 or employee of the Secretary’s office, in connection with 

9 the production of evidence authorized in section one of this 

10 resolution. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB