alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016118EN.01003601.xml

| 4.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/36

---

Action brought on 15 February 2016 — Puma v EUIPO — Doosan Infracore (PUMA)

(Case T-62/16)

(2016/C 118/41)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Puma SE (Herzogenaurach, Germany) (represented by: P. González-Bueno Catalán de Ocón, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Doosan Infracore Co. Ltd (Incheon, South Korea)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

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

Applicant of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: figurative mark containing the word element ‘PUMA’ — EU trade mark application No 11 376 209

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 December 2015 in Case R 1052/2015-4

Contested decision:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and Doosan Infracore Co. Ltd. to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and Doosan Infracore Co. Ltd. to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
2 

information or accusations founded on facts supported only by impalpable 

or highly suspect evidence." Silks v. State, 92 Nev. 91, 94, 545 P.2d 1159, 

1161 (1976). A sentence that falls within the statutory limits is not 

considered cruel and unusual punishment "unless the statute fixing 

punishment is unconstitutional or the sentence is so unreasonably 

disproportionate to the offense as to shock the conscience." Blume v. 

State, 112 Nev. 472, 475, 915 P.2d 282, 284 (1996) (internal quotation 

marks omitted); see also Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957, 1000-01 

(1991) (plurality opinion). 

Appellant does not argue that the district court relied on 

impalpable or highly suspect evidence or that the relevant statutes are 

unconstitutional. The sentence imposed was within the parameters 

provided by the relevant statutes. See NRS 193.130(2)(d); NRS 

200.481(2)(e)(2); NRS 205.690(2). At sentencing, the district court was 

made aware of the opportunity for appellant to be gainfully employed as 

well as the availability of a safe and sober living situation. Appellant 

proposed services through Northern Nevada Adult Mental Health Services 

as a condition of probation, which respondent argued against given the 

gravity of appellant's crimes. We conclude that the sentence imposed is 

not unreasonably disproportionate to the offense and therefore does not 

constitute cruel and unusual punishment and that the district court did 

not abuse its discretion. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 

Hardesty 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A < • 
cc: Hon. David A. Hardy, District Judge 

Washoe County Alternate Public Defender 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Washoe County District Attorney 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

3
IN RE: Appeal of the DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NO. 18-PDB-050

NO. 2018-OB-2082

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 18, 2019

Leave to appeal denied.
# C_2017249EN.01001603.xml

| 31.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 249/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 249/16

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 20 March 2017 — Manuela Maturi and Others v Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma

(Case C-142/17)

(2017/C 249/25)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Manuela Maturi, Laura Di Segni, Isabella Lo Balbo, Maria Badini, Loredana Barbanera

Defendant: Fondazione Teatro dell’Opera di Roma

Question referred

Is the national legislation referred to in Article 3(7) of Decree Law No 64 of 30 April 2010, converted into Law No 100 of 29 June 2010, according to which ‘
  for workers in the performing arts belonging to the category of dancers, the retirement age is fixed for men and women at the forty-fifth year of chronological age, with the use, for workers to whom the contributory or mixed system applies in full, of the transformation coefficient referred to in Article 1(6) of the Law of 8 August 1995, No 335, relative to the higher age. For the two years following the date of entry into force of this provision, the workers referred to in this paragraph employed on contracts of indefinite duration, who have reached or passed the retirement age, are afforded the option, renewable annually, of remaining in service. This option must be exercised through a formal application to be presented to the ENPALS within two months of the date of entry into force of this provision, or at least three months before pension rights are fully vested, without prejudice to the maximum retirement age of forty-seven years for women and fifty-two for men
  ’, contrary to the principle of non-discrimination on grounds of sex, as laid down in Directive 2006/54 (1) and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (Article 21)?

---

(1)  Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast) (OJ 2006 L 204, p. 23).

---
Timothy OWENS v. STATE of Mississippi

2017-CT-01044-COA

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Filed: March 6, 2019 Closed: May 9, 2019

Motion Desc: Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Certiorari - Denied.
# C_2019131EN.01000902.xml

| 8.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 14 February 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt — Sweden) — Rebecka Jonsson v Société du Journal L’Est Républicain

(Case C-554/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - European small claims procedure - Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 - Article 16 - ‘Unsuccessful party’ - Costs of proceedings - Apportionment - Article 19 - Procedural law of the Member States)

(2019/C 131/11)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Svea hovrätt

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Rebecka Jonsson

Defendant: Société du Journal L’Est Républicain

Operative part of the judgment

Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 establishing a European Small Claims Procedure must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which, where a party succeeds only in part, the national court may order each of the parties to the proceedings to bear its own procedural costs or may apportion those costs between those parties. In such a situation, the national court remains, theoretically, free to apportion the amount of those costs, provided that the national procedural rules on the apportionment of procedural costs in small cross-border claims are not less favourable than the procedural rules governing similar situations subject to domestic law and that the procedural requirements relating to the apportionment of those procedural costs do not result in the persons concerned foregoing the use of that European small claims procedure by requiring an applicant, when he has been largely successful, nonetheless to bear his own procedural costs or a substantial portion of those costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 402, 27.11.2017.

---
Honorable Clifford 3. Roe 

County Attorney 

Panola County 

Carthage, Texas L 

.,, 

Dear Sir : ’ 

” ,. 

Opinion Nmber O-4078 

Re: Use of oertaln funds 

derived from road bonds 

where speolfic use had 

been designated in the 

election. 

We have your letter of September 26, setting out 

certain facts and propounding a question for our opinion 

thereon. 

After. studying the facts outlined Fn your letter 

we reach, the conclusion that an election was held at which 

County-wide road bonds were voted’, and that the election 

proceedings spehlf’loally designated the purposes for which 

the proceeds thereof should be used, amoixg which speolfiedpurposes we find that oertain moneys were earmarked for use 

in. the construation of a road from the tWn of Clayton to 

the town of Longbranch, both of which are' lbcated in Panola 

couilty. A certain porti.on of the funds irere used in accokdante with that designat'ion and'that there is now a balance 

on hand whiah is proposed to be used in the constructioti of 

a road running from the town of Clayton and-connkcting with 

thi Pinehlll road which Is a point about one mile from the 

town of Longbranch. Your question Is: 

"Can the above fund8 be used on the ClaytbnPinehill-Longbranoh route or do they haves tom be 

used ori the Clayton-Longbranch route where few 

or no people live?" 

The purposes for whFoh the proaeeds of the bonds 

were to be used being a part of the election proceedings 

would require that the funds’ derived from’ said- bonds beused only in accordance therewith.' In the case of Moore 

v. Coffman, 200 3. W. 374, the general rule is land down 
Honorable Clifford 3. Roe, page 2 (O-4078) 

by the Supreme Court and is substantially that if the pur-,; 

pose for issuing bonds is specIfically stated in the petition, order and notice of eleatlon, the voters have the 

right to rely on such statement and the use of suah bond' 

funds otherwise would be prohlblted by law. Suoh a statement beaomes a part of an implied eontraat entered Into 

between the voters and the authorities entrusted with the 

expenditure of suoh funds. 

It is, therefore, our oplnlon that that portion of 

the funds earmarked for use Fn the construotion' of a road 

from Clayton to Longbranch aannot ,legally be used in the 

construction of a road beginning at Clayton and terminating 

at any plaae other than Longbraneh. We belleve this to be 

true without regard to the population of the dlstrlct through 

which said road is to run. 

TrustFng that the fore~golng fully answers your inquiry, we are 

Very truly yours 

CEC-a:mjs 

,. 

ATTORREYf3BIWRALOFTEXAS 

By /s/ Clarence E.'Crowe 

Clarenae E. Crowe 

Assistant 

A~PPROVRD OPIRIOIV COMMITTBg 

By /s/ BWB CBAIRI'lAR
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 24

- 00102

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.L.E.F. AND B.Z.F. , Children

From the 285th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2023PA00245

Honorable Raul Perales , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE CHAPA

, JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ , AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

AFFIRMED

. It is ORDERED that no costs be assessed against appellant in relation to this ap peal

because appellant qualif ies as indigent under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.

SIGNED July 17, 2024.

_____________________________ Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Case 4:05-cv-00049-A Document 11 Filed 05/11/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 73
 

 Case 4:05-cv-00049-A Document 11 Filed 05/11/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 74
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CO-CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER**

Required by Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. §1350, 

created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 

 

The undersigned officer of ECC Capital Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 

 

(i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

 

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company at the dates andfor the periods indicated. 

 

Dated: January 26, 2006 

 

 

The foregoing certification isbeing furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing ofthe Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing. 

 

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 theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer of**

**Advance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc.**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**

**(Adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002)**

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Advance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc.(the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, J. Patrick O’Shaughnessy,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|                 | /s/ J. PATRICK O’SHAUGHNESSY                  |
|----------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|                 | J. Patrick O’Shaughnessy                           |
|                 | *Executive Vice President and Chief Financial  Officer* |
|                 |                                                    |
| August 10, 2009 |                                                    |

 

----
#### H. G. Basford, George M. Warren and Samuel Scher, as Creditors and Depositors of Farmers Bank & Trust Co., for Themselves and All Other Creditors of Said Farmers Bank & Trust Co., Similarly Situated, *Appellants,*v. Farmers Bank & Trust Co., a Corporation of Florida, and Ernest Amos, as Comptroller of the State of Florida, Intervener, *Appellees.*

Division B.

Decision Filed October 12, 1927.

*Ritter*c§ *Rankin,*and *P. N. Hiatt,*for Appellants;

*Winters <& Foskett & Wilcox,*for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the orders or decrees herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said orders or decrees; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged *637by the Court that the said orders or decrees of the Circuit Court be, and the same are hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 2 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.2
                                       Agreed to January 3, 2025        

                     One Hundred Nineteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday,
         the third day of January, two thousand and twenty five

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That the two Houses of Congress shall meet in the Hall of the House of 
Representatives on Monday, the 6th day of January 2025, at 1 o'clock 
post meridian, pursuant to the requirements of the Constitution and 
laws relating to the election of President and Vice President of the 
United States, and the President of the Senate shall be their Presiding 
Officer; that two tellers shall be previously appointed by the 
President of the Senate on the part of the Senate and two by the 
Speaker on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be 
handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the 
certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral 
votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and 
acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the 
letter ``A''; and said tellers, having then read the same in the 
presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes 
as they shall appear from said certificates; and the votes having been 
ascertained and counted in the manner and according to the rules by law 
provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of 
the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which 
announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, 
if any, elected President and Vice President of the United States, and 
together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the 
two Houses.
Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, John M.Ballbach, certify that:

1.     I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of VWR International, Inc.;

2.     Based onmy knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a)     Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)     Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)     Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)     Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b)     Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| /s/ John M. Ballbach                                  |     |     |
|-------------------------------------------------------|----------|----------|
| Name: John M.  Ballbach                               |     |     |
| Title:* **President and Chief Executive Officer* | * * | * * |
| Dated: May 11,  2006                             | * * | * * |

 

----
**EXHIBIT
        32**
  **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 Capital Growth Systems, Inc. (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, Lee
        Wiskowski, the Co-Chief Executive Officer of the Company, I , Douglas Stukel,
        the Co-Chief Executive Officer of the Company and, I, Derry L. Behm, Chief
        Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my
        knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.


Date: May
              22,
              2006/s/ Lee
              WiskowskiLee
              Wiskowski, Co-Chief Executive
              Officer




/s/ Douglas
              StukelDouglas
                Stukel, Co-Chief Executive
                Officer




/s/ Derry
              L.
              BehmDerry
              L. Behm, Chief Financial and Accounting
              Officer








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.
  The
        foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
        Commission pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as an exhibit to the Report
        and is
        not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
        document.