alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2018352EN.01000701.xml

| 1.10.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 352/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.10.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 352/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 7 August 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Administration des douanes et des droits indirects, Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer) v Hubert Clergeau and Others

(Case C-115/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EEC) No 1964/82 - False declarations or deceitful practices in order to secure special export refunds on certain cuts of boned meat of bovine animals - Amendment to Regulation No 1964/82 extending the entitlement to special export refunds - Principle of the retroactive application of the more lenient criminal law - Third sentence of Article 49(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union))

(2018/C 352/09)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Administration des douanes et des droits indirects, Établissement national des produits de l’agriculture et de la mer (FranceAgriMer)

Defendants: Hubert Clergeau, Jean-Luc Labrousse, Jean-Jacques Berthellemy, Alain Bouchet, Jean-Pierre Dubois, Marcel Géry, Jean-Paul Matrat, Jean-Pierre Paziot, Patrice Raillot

Operative part of the judgment

The principle of the retroactive application of the more lenient criminal law, enshrined in the third sentence of Article 49(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding a situation in which a person is convicted on the ground that he wrongfully obtained special export refunds provided for in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1964/82 of 20 July 1982 laying down the conditions for granting special export refunds on certain cuts of boned meat of bovine animals, by means of deceitful practices or the making of false statements as to the nature of the goods in respect of which the refunds were requested, although, as a result of changes in those rules which occurred subsequent to the acts complained of, the goods that were exported by that person have since become eligible for those refunds.

---

(1)  OJ C 178, 6.6.2017.

---
# C_2016251EN.01003701.xml

| 11.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 251/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/37

---

Action brought on 4 May 2016 — Cop v EUIPO — Conexa (AMPHIBIAN)

(Case T-215/16)

(2016/C 251/43)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Cop Vertriebs-GmbH (Aresing, Germany) (represented by: H. Hofmann, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Conexa LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, United States)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the mark ‘AMPHIBIAN’ — International registration designating the European Union No 359 251

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 March 2016 in Case R 1984/2015-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul or alter the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul or alter the contested decision;

| — | annul or alter the decision of the Cancellation Division of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 September 2015 in cancellation proceedings No 9736 C; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul or alter the decision of the Cancellation Division of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 September 2015 in cancellation proceedings No 9736 C;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs;

| — | fix a date for the hearing. |
| --- | --- |

—

fix a date for the hearing.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) and consequently (b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) and consequently (b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
Case 2:03-cv-00442-J Document 20 Filed 11/22/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 160
Chloe J. BOWMAN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Adam W. BOWMAN, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1088

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 10, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### May 12, 2014 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
QUETZELINA LUBE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. NCO FINANCIAL SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee. No. 14-1014 (D.C. No. 1:02-CV-02158-MSK-PAC) (D. Colo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before GORSUCH , MURPHY , and HOLMES , Circuit Judges. Quetzelina Lube’s appeal comes to us almost a decade after her suit was dismissed. Since that dismissal Ms. Lube has filed repeated motions for reconsideration. This appeal concerns the latest effort. We discern no reversible error in the district court’s decision to deny Ms. Lube’s current motion. Even viewing it generously, the two paragraph pleading does not specify grounds for reconsideration sufficient to meet the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). And

* After examining the brief and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.to the extent Ms. Lube seeks to challenge the original dismissal of her suit, the time for that appeal has passed. Affirmed.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Neil M. Gorsuch Circuit Judge

2
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AND EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(b)
AND 15d-14(b)


(Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Innovative Card Technologies, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Richard
Nathan, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge
and belief:





(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 the operation of the
      Company.





/s/Richard
      NathanChief
      Executive Officer
                Innovative
      Card Technologies, Inc





This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2018094EN.01002601.xml

| 12.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 94/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 94/26

---

Order of the General Court of 15 January 2018 — ArcelorMittal Belval & Differdange and ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe v ECHA

(Case T-762/16) (1)

1

((Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents held by the ECHA - Request relating to documents and to the identity of an initial requestor of access to information of a registrant of substances under Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 - Partial refusal of access - Withdrawal of the decision refusing access - No need to adjudicate))

(2018/C 094/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: ArcelorMittal Belval & Differdange SA (Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg) and ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe AG (Duisburg, Germany) (represented by: H. Scheidmann and M. Kottmann, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented: initially by M. Heikkilä, C. Buchanan and E. Maurage, and subsequently by M. Heikkilä, C. Buchanan and W. Broere, acting as Agents, and by G. Gilmore, Barrister)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking annulment of Decision ATD/52/2016 of the ECHA of 26 September 2016, notified to the applicants on 28 September 2016, which granted partial access to the requested documents regarding an earlier application for access to documents held by the ECHA.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene made by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for leave to intervene made by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

| 3. | The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) shall, in addition to bearing its own costs, pay those incurred by ArcelorMittal Belval & Differdange SA and ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe AG. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) shall, in addition to bearing its own costs, pay those incurred by ArcelorMittal Belval & Differdange SA and ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe AG.

| 4. | The EMA shall bear its own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The EMA shall bear its own costs relating to the application for leave to intervene.

---

(1)  OJ C 14, 16.1.2017.

1

---
Steven Louis KAUFMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-375

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed March 26, 2019

AFFIRMED.
Kenneth B. LAVARRE, DOC #540547, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1602

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 22, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUTPUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 96-40512

Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

HARVEY QUINONES,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(B-95-CR-219-6)

_________________________________________________________________

March 21, 1997

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Harvey Quinones appeals his conviction for conspiracy to

possess with intent to distribute cocaine and possession with

intent to distribute cocaine. Quinones contends that the district

court erred in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal. We

hold that the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find

Quinones guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v.

Maltos, 985 F.2d 743, 746 (5th Cir. 1992); United States v.
- 2 -

Ramirez, 963 F.2d 693, 701 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 944

(1992).

AFFIRMED.
# C_2019093EN.01001401.xml

| 11.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/14

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 24 January 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Centrale Raad van Beroep — Netherlands) — Raad van bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank v D. Balandin, I. Lukachenko, Holiday on Ice Services BV

(Case C-477/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social security - Regulation (EU) No 1231/2010 - Applicable legislation - A1 certificate - Article 1 - Extension of coordination of social security systems to citizens of third countries residing legally in the territory of a Member State - Legal residence - Concept))

(2019/C 93/17)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Centrale Raad van Beroep

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Raad van bestuur van de Sociale Verzekeringsbank

Defendants: D. Balandin, I. Lukachenko, Holiday on Ice Services BV

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1 of Regulation (EU) No 1231/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 extending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 to nationals of third countries who are not already covered by these Regulations solely on the ground of their nationality must be interpreted as meaning that third country nationals, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, who temporarily reside and work in different Member States in the service of an employer established in a Member State, may rely on the coordination rules laid down by Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, and Regulation (EC) No 987/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 laying down the procedure for Regulation No 883/2004, in order to determine the social security legislation to which they are subject, provided that they are legally staying and working in the territory of the Member States.

---

(1)  OJ C 357, 23.10.2017.

---
Case 3:05-cv-00097-P Document 11 Filed 06/09/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 29
Renette BAPTISTE-FAUSTI, Appellant, v. HOMEOWNERS CHOICE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Appellee.

No. 4D18-992

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 4, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
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 Accellent Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Stewart A. Fisher, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



Date:
May 9, 2005

/s/
Stewart A. Fisher

Stewart
A. Fisher
Chief Financial Officer

---



QuickLinks
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

February 19, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 134844(24) Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. JERRY EVON SPENCER, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellant, Justices

v SC: 134844 COA: 278922 Muskegon CC: 07-045248-AH DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for re consideration of this Court’s November 29, 2007 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it doe s not appear that the order was entered erroneously.

p0211 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.

February 19, 2008

Clerk
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 17 Filed 02/20/04 Page 1 of 3 PageID 30
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 17 Filed 02/20/04 Page 2 of 3 PageID 31
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 17 Filed 02/20/04 Page 3 of 3 PageID 32
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 238 

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to clarify that artificial 

intelligence and machine learning technologies can qualify as a practitioner eligible to prescribe drugs if authorized by the State involved 

and approved, cleared, or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 7, 2025 

Mr. SCHWEIKERT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to 

clarify that artificial intelligence and machine learning 

technologies can qualify as a practitioner eligible to prescribe drugs if authorized by the State involved and 

approved, cleared, or authorized by the Food and Drug 

Administration, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Healthy Technology 

5 Act of 2025’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 238 IH

1 SEC. 2. PRESCRIPTION OF DRUGS BY ARTIFICIAL INTEL2 LIGENCE OR MACHINE LEARNING TECH3 NOLOGIES. 

4 Section 503(b) of Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 

5 Act (21 U.S.C. 353(b)) is amended by adding at the end 

6 the following: 

7 ‘‘(6) In this subsection, the term ‘practitioner li8 censed by law to administer such drug’ includes artificial 

9 intelligence and machine learning technology that are— 

10 ‘‘(A) authorized pursuant to a statute of the 

11 State involved to prescribe the drug involved; and 

12 ‘‘(B) approved, cleared, or authorized under 

13 section 510(k), 513, 515, or 564.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Case 2:03-cv-00407-J Document 18 Filed 10/28/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 90
Kenneth STEFFEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-3636

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 6, 2019]

Kenneth Steffen, Doral, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed* . *See**Patterson v. State* , 141 So.3d 707, 708 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (recognizing that "claims of entitlement to out-of-state *961jail credit must be raised in a timely motion under rule 3.850").

Ciklin, Levine and Conner, JJ., concur.
H. Res. 1 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 3, 2025. 

Resolved, That Kevin McCumber of the State of Illinois 

be, and is hereby, chosen Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Resolved, That William McFarland of the State of Maryland be, and is hereby, chosen Sergeant-at-Arms of the 

House of Representatives. 

Resolved, That Catherine Szpindor of the Commonwealth 

of Virginia be, and is hereby, chosen Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
EXHIBIT 13.1




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 Amendment No. 1 to the annual report of MAX Resource Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stuart Rogers, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 /s/Stuart Rogers
 ________________________________
 Stuart Rogers
 Chief Executive Officer
 Principal Executive Officer
 June 18, 2013
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 15, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Page 3883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00701]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Center for Indigenous Innovation and Health Equity Tribal 
Advisory Committee; Solicitation of Nominations for Delegates

AGENCY: Office of Minority Health, Office of the Secretary, Department 
of Health and Human Services.

ACTION: Notice; correcting amendment.

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

SUMMARY: On January 8, 2025, we published a Federal Register Notice 
requesting nomination letters for the CIIHE TAC delegates. This 
correcting amendment corrects two errors: the submission deadline and 
the notification timeframe for nominee selection.

DATES: Tribal leaders are encouraged to submit their nomination letters 
for CIIHE TAC delegates by February 18, 2025, at the address listed 
below. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of 
Minority Health (OMH) will continue to receive nominations until all 
CIIHE TAC primary and alternate delegate positions are filled.

ADDRESSES: All nominations should be emailed to [email protected]. 
Please use the subject line ``CIIHE TAC Nomination.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information and guidance about the 
nomination process for CIIHE TAC delegates, please contact Rochelle 
Rollins, Senior Policy Advisor, at [email protected]. Sample 
CIIHE TAC nomination letters are available on the OMH website: https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/ciihe-tribal-advisory-committee-tac.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authorized under Section 1707 of the Public 
Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 300u-6, as amended, the mission of OMH is 
to improve the health of racial and ethnic minority and American Indian 
and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations through the development of health 
policies and programs that help eliminate health disparities. OMH 
awards and other activities are intended to support the identification 
of effective policies, programs, and practices that improve health 
outcomes and to promote the sustainability and dissemination of these 
approaches.

Summary of Errors

    Tribal leaders are encouraged to submit their nomination letters 
for CIIHE TAC delegates by February 18, 2025. Nominees will be notified 
of the delegate selection status in March 2025.

Tarsha Cavanaugh,
Capt, Principal Deputy Director, Office of Minority Health.
[FR Doc. 2025-00701 Filed 1-14-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-29-P
```