alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019206EN.01005101.xml

| 17.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/51

---

Action brought on 3 April 2019 — GEA Group v Commission

(Case T-195/19)

(2019/C 206/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: GEA Group AG (Düsseldorf, Germany) (represented by: I. du Mont, R. van der Hout and C. Wagner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Commission decision BUDG/DGAl/C/4/PL/Ares(2019) s. 283284 of 24 January 2019; and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Commission decision BUDG/DGAl/C/4/PL/Ares(2019) s. 283284 of 24 January 2019; and

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the contested decision violates Article 266 TFEU as it would have declined to repay the fines paid by the applicant in order to comply with Commission decision C(2016) 3920 of 29 June 2016. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the contested decision violates Article 266 TFEU as it would have declined to repay the fines paid by the applicant in order to comply with Commission decision C(2016) 3920 of 29 June 2016.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the contested decision violates Article 266 TFEU as it would have reapplied de facto decision C(2010) 727 (final) of 8 February 2010 or Commission decision C(2016) 3920 of 29 June 2016 which both would have been annulled by the General Court by the judgment of 15 July 2015, GEA Group v Commission, T-189/10, EU:T:2015:504 and by the judgment of 18 October 2018, GEA Group v Commission, T-640/16, EU:T:2018:700 respectively. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the contested decision violates Article 266 TFEU as it would have reapplied de facto decision C(2010) 727 (final) of 8 February 2010 or Commission decision C(2016) 3920 of 29 June 2016 which both would have been annulled by the General Court by the judgment of 15 July 2015, GEA Group v Commission, T-189/10, EU:T:2015:504 and by the judgment of 18 October 2018, GEA Group v Commission, T-640/16, EU:T:2018:700 respectively.

---
United States District Court

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

wo. CA BME [10

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Nother Thomas

eee eeerrewrne

ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL

The above-named defendant has testified under oath or has filed with the court an Affidavit
of Financial Status and thereby satisfied this court that he or she is financially unable to employ

counsel.

Accordingly, the FEDERAL DEFENDER PROGRAM is heteby appointed to represent
this defendant in the above designated case unless telieved by an order of this court or by order

of the court of appeals.

_ov me im heen

Signature of U.S. District Court Judge,
Magistrate Judge (or Clerk or Deputy
Clerk by order of the Court)

DATE: =

Foc inte! oppor er On by
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Entrust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

The
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (the Report) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |        |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: August 6, 2008 |  |        |  | /s/ F. William Conner  
|                     |  | Name:  |  | F. William Conner      
|                     |  | Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### In the Matter of Khalil M. Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent; Ebony A., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In the Matter of Xavier A. Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent; Ebony A., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 2.) In the Matter of A’Taja A. Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent; Ebony A., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 3.)

[942 NYS2d 370]

In three related child neglect proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the mother appeals from an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Kings County (Beckoff, J.), dated April 6, 2011, which, after a fact-finding hearing, found that she had neglected the subject children.

Ordered that the order of fact-finding is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The mother appeals from a fact-finding order, which found that she neglected the subject children by failing to supply them with an adequate education *(see*Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [A]). At a fact-finding hearing in a neglect proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the petitioner has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the subject children were neglected *(see*Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]; *Matter of Aliyah B. [Denise J.],*87 AD3d 943 [2011]). Here, the petitioner met its burden of establishing educational neglect by submitting evidence that, for several school years, each of the three subject children suffered excessive school absences and tardiness for which the mother failed to offer a reasonable justification *(see*Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [A]; *Matter of Aliyah B. [Denise J.],*87 AD3d 943 [2011]; *Matter of Mariah C. [Frey*
      *1004
      *C.-M],*84 AD3d 1372 [2011]; *Matter of Deanna R.G. [Rajkumare B.],*83 AD3d 1064 [2011]; *Matter of Eric C. [Barbara C.],*79 AD3d 1037 [2010]; *Matter of Evan F.,*48 AD3d 811 [2008]).

The mother’s remaining contention is without merit. Dillon, J.E, Angiolillo, Belen and Cohen, JJ., concur.
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350








In connection with this Annual Report of Nordic American Tankers Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31, 2018 as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Bjørn Giaever, 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:








(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.








A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its
      staff upon request.








Date: June 6, 2019








/s/ Bjørn
          Giaever


Bjørn Giaever


Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
#### Sarbro Realty Corporation, Appellant, v Ara Kradjian et al., Respondents.

— Casey, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Ellison, J.), entered May 22, 1985 in Broome County, which, *inter alia,*directed plaintiff to respond to various disclosure demands served by defendants.

Plaintiff commenced this action by service of a summons *867with notice, followed by a 25-page complaint which contained 90 separate paragraphs and sought injunctive relief and treble damages for alleged violations of the State’s Donnelly Antitrust Act (General Business Law § 340), which prohibits the unreasonable restraint of trade. Shortly after answering, certain defendants served disclosure demands, including written interrogatories, a demand for witnesses’ names and addresses, a notice of deposition and a notice of discovery and inspection. The written interrogatories were contained in a 31-page document and consisted of some 200 questions. The remaining defendants served a lengthy demand for a bill of particulars which consisted of 63 numbered demands. Plaintiff moved for a protective order vacating, conditioning or limiting defendants’ demands. Special Term effectively denied plaintiff’s motion, directing it to respond to the disclosure demands to the best of its ability. Plaintiff appeals.

The trial court is vested with broad discretion in supervising disclosure *(see, e.g., Nitz v Prudential-Bache Sec.,*102 AD2d 914; *Maggio v State of New York,*88 AD2d 1087). This discretion must be exercised in light of the court’s broader duty to facilitate the resolution of civil actions *(Plattsburgh Distrib. Co. v Hudson Val. Wine Co.,*108 AD2d 1043) and based upon the well-settled principle that the disclosure provisions of the CPLR are to be interpreted liberally, with the test being one of usefulness and reason *(Allen v Crowell-Collier Pub. Co.,*21 NY2d 403, 406).

The parties are in agreement that this is a complex case. Special Term concluded that although defendants’ demands were lengthy and searching, to the point of being "intimidating”, they were "necessary and proper given the breadth of plaintiff’s allegations”. The court also found no reason to require defendants to submit to depositions prior to receiving plaintiff’s response to the disclosure demands, thereby rejecting plaintiff’s claim that it was entitled to priority of disclosure. Our review of the record reveals no abuse of discretion by Special Term and, therefore, its order should be affirmed.

Order affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Wayne Lee PRICE, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 08-7292.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 7, 2009.

Decided: Jan. 13, 2009.

Wayne Lee Price, Appellant Pro Se. Jeb Thomas Terrien, Assistant United States Attorney, Harrisonburg, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Wayne Lee Price appeals the district court’s order denying Price’s motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v.*Price, No. 5:03-cr-70006-sgw (W.D.Va. June 19 & July 14, 2008). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
# C_2019206EN.01009001.xml

| 17.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/90 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/90

---

Action brought on 11 April 2019 — Café Camelo v EUIPO — Camel Brand (CAMEL BRAND FOOD PRODUCTS)

(Case T-244/19)

(2019/C 206/79)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Café Camelo, SL (Villanueva del Pardillo, Spain) (represented by: M. de Justo Bailey, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Camel Brand Co. Ltd (Zebbug, Malta)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union trade mark — Application for registration No 15 710 692

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2019 in Case R 1165/2018-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision. |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision.

| — | order the defendant (and intervener, if he enters an appearance in proceedings) to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant (and intervener, if he enters an appearance in proceedings) to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Annual Report of Communications & Power Industries
Holding Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending September
27, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, O. Joe Caldarelli, Chief Executive 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:

      (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/ O. Joe Caldarelli


O. Joe Caldarelli
Chief Executive Officer
December 12, 2002
# C_2023024EN.01003102.xml

| 23.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/31

---

Order of the President of the Tenth Chamber of the Court of 5 October 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie — Poland) — J.K., B.K. v Przedsiębiorstwo Państwowe X

(Case C-452/21) (1)

(2023/C 24/42)

Language of the case: Polish

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

---

(1)  OJ C 24, 17.1.2022.

---
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

I, Douglas R.
Young, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of NeoMagic Corporation on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended July 29, 2007
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of NeoMagic Corporation.

Date: November 9, 2007



By:

/s/ Douglas R. YoungName:

Douglas R. YoungTitle:

Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                                        EXHIBIT 12


                                                             MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST II
                                                             MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING II, L.P.
                                                               COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO
                                                   COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED SECURITIES DISTRIBUTIONS
                                                                    (dollars in thousands)


                                             FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED               FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                   MARCH 28, 2003                          MARCH 29, 2002
                                         ----------------------------------       ----------------------------------
                                          MERRILL LYNCH      MERRILL LYNCH         MERRILL LYNCH      MERRILL LYNCH
                                            PREFERRED          PREFERRED             PREFERRED          PREFERRED
                                        CAPITAL TRUST II   FUNDING II, L.P.      CAPITAL TRUST II   FUNDING II, L.P.
                                         ---------------    ---------------       ---------------    ---------------
<S>                                        <C>                <C>                   <C>                <C>
Earnings                                    $  6,186           $  7,218              $  6,186           $  7,236
                                            ========           ========              ========           ========



Fixed charges                               $      -           $      -              $      -           $     -

Preferred securities distribution
  requirements                                 6,000              6,186                 6,000              6,186
                                            --------           --------              --------           --------

Total combined fixed charges and
  preferred securities distributions        $  6,000           $  6,186              $  6,000           $  6,186
                                            ========           ========              ========           ========

Ratio of earnings to combined
  fixed charges and preferred
  securities distributions                      1.03               1.17                  1.03               1.17




</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, the undersigned officer of RenaissancE Learning, Inc. (the
"Company"), hereby certifies that, to the undersigned's knowledge:

      (1)   the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
            June 30, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
            Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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: August 6, 2004

                                 /s/ Steven A. Schmidt
                                 ---------------------------------------------
                                 Name:  Steven A. Schmidt
                                 Title: Executive Vice President and
                                        Chief Financial Officer

THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT ACCOMPANIES THIS REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 AND SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE FILED BY THE COMPANY
FOR PURPOSES OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         338,482
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  239,138
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               655,072
<PP&E>                                         263,317
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,194,133
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          119,155
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       609,570
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,194,133
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               144,584
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   58,785
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,227
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 85,799
<INCOME-TAX>                                    15,648
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    70,151
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.12
  StarTek
USA, Inc. (StarTek), AT&T Mobility LLC,
 RECITALS
     1.
    
    Section 8. Term and Extension of Relationship of the MSA is hereby deleted in its
entirety and it is replaced by the following:8. Term and Extension of RelationshipThis MSA is effective as of March 21, 2002 (Effective Date) and ends on May 30, 2008.3.
    
    Except as amended by this Amendment, the MSA and all responsibilities are not otherwise
modified, revoked or superseded and remain in full force and effect.
  AT&T Mobility LLC by its authorized
    
    
    
    StarTek USA, Inc.Representative AT&T Services, Inc.By:
    
    /s/ George Atchison
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Patrick HayesPrinted Name: George Atchison
    
    
    
    Printed Name: Patrick HayesTitle: Senior Contract Manager
    
    
    
    Title: EVP & COODate: 4/30/2008
    
    
    
    Date: 4/30/08
 Proprietary Information
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
unaudited interim consolidated financial statements of Rose Hills Company and
subsidiaries, for the six months ended June 30, 1999 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,214
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,177
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        976
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,376
<PP&E>                                          63,245
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 319,516
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,253
<BONDS>                                         80,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     131,402
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   319,516
<SALES>                                         43,098
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                43,098
<CGS>                                           26,650
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,650
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,225
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,870
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,853
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,743
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,110
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>