alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019372EN.01003601.xml

| 4.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 372/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 372/36

---

Action brought on 19 September 2019 — Daw v EUIPO (SOS Loch- und Rissfüller)

(Case T-626/19)

(2019/C 372/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Daw SE (Ober-Ramstadt, Germany) (represented by: A. Haberl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Registration of the European Union word mark ‘SOS Loch- und Rissfüller’ — Application for registration No 17 870 692

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 July 2019 in Case R 278/2019-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | annul the Decision of EUIPO of 7 January 2019 in so far as it rejects the application for registration of the mark ‘SOS Loch- und Rissfüller’ in respect of the following goods:






  — | ‘Class 1 — Chemicals used in industry; Masonry preservatives and dampers, roof tiles, cements and concrete, except paints and oils; Synthetic resins, synthetic resins and unprocessed plastics; Solvents (chemical -); Fillers for use in coating paints (not included in other classes) |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

annul the Decision of EUIPO of 7 January 2019 in so far as it rejects the application for registration of the mark ‘SOS Loch- und Rissfüller’ in respect of the following goods:

—

‘Class 1 — Chemicals used in industry; Masonry preservatives and dampers, roof tiles, cements and concrete, except paints and oils; Synthetic resins, synthetic resins and unprocessed plastics; Solvents (chemical -); Fillers for use in coating paints (not included in other classes)

| — | Class 2 — Raw natural resins |
| --- | --- |

—

Class 2 — Raw natural resins

| — | Class 19 — Mortar for building construction; Quartz; Coatings (building materials); Cleaning preparations; Compositions for building devices; Filaments being building materials; Fabrics for building purposes, not of metal or predominantly non-metallic materials, in particular stabilising fabric’; |
| --- | --- |

—

Class 19 — Mortar for building construction; Quartz; Coatings (building materials); Cleaning preparations; Compositions for building devices; Filaments being building materials; Fabrics for building purposes, not of metal or predominantly non-metallic materials, in particular stabilising fabric’;

| — | order EUIPO to allow the application for registration to be published, as lodged; |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to allow the application for registration to be published, as lodged;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (2) of Regulation No 2017/1001. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (2) of Regulation No 2017/1001.

---
# C_2022432EN.01001701.xml

| 14.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 432/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 432/17

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2022 — Helsingin kaupunki v Commission

(Case T-597/19) (1)

(State aid - Coach and bus transport - Equipment loan and capital loans granted by the City of Helsinki - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Existing aid - Advantage - Application of the private creditor criterion in a market economy test - Public status of the debtor - Taking into account an existing aid scheme - Application of the private investor criterion in a market economy test - Economic continuity - Procedural rights of the interested parties - Article 108(2) TFEU - Obligation to state reasons - General principles of EU law)

(2022/C 432/18)

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Applicant: Helsingin kaupunki (Helsinki, Finland) (represented by: I. Aalto-Setälä and H. Koivuniemi, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: M. Huttunen and F. Tomat, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the applicant: Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski and H. Leppo, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Nobina Oy (Espoo, Finland), Nobina AB (Solna, Sweden) (represented by: J. Åkermarck and T. Kalliokoski, lawyers)

Re:

By its action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Commission Decision (EU) 2020/1814 of 28 June 2019 on State aid SA.33846 — (2015/C) (ex 2014/NN) (ex 2011/CP) implemented by Finland for Helsingin Bussiliikenne Oy (OJ 2020 L 404, p. 10).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Helsingin kaupunki to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures, as well as those incurred by Nobina Oy and Nobina AB; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Helsingin kaupunki to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures, as well as those incurred by Nobina Oy and Nobina AB;

| 3. | Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 363, 28.10.2019.

---
#### Howard L. Grobe, Jr., Respondent, v Michelle L. McAndrew et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

[944 NYS2d 713]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Gerald J. Whalen, J.), entered August 1, 2011 in a personal injury action. The order denied the motion of defendants Michelle L. McAndrew and Karen L. McAndrew to dismiss plaintiffs complaint.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Present — Scudder, P.J., Fahey, Lindley and Martoche, JJ.
#### Ornela Cere, Appellant, v Subway International B.V., Respondent.

[945 NYS2d 552]

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.), entered August 25, 2011, granting respondent’s motion to vacate a default judgment against it, and dismissing the petition to vacate an arbitration award, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Contrary to petitioner’s argument, respondent timely served its motion papers by mailing them more than nine days before the return date, using an overnight delivery service *(see*CPLR 2103 [b] [6]; 2214 [b]).

Petitioner failed to show that the petition was served on a person authorized to receive service of process pursuant to CPLR 311 (a) (1). The provision of the parties’ franchise agreement on which petitioner relies concerns only service of a notice required by the agreements, not service of process required by the CPLR. Moreover, commencement of the proceeding was untimely, since the purported service occurred more than 90 days after the award was received *(see Werner Enters. Co. v New York City Law Dept.,*281 AD2d 253 [2001], *lv denied*97 NY2d 601 [2001]).

In any event, the petition fails to present a basis for vacating the arbitration award. The omission of a reference to a tax withholding requirement does not create an explicit conflict with any law or public policy requiring tax withholding *(see Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York,*94 NY2d 321, 327 [1999]). Petitioner’s argument that the award is barred by res judicata is without merit, since it relies on a proceeding to which petitioner was not a party *(see Matter of Hunter, 4*NY3d 260, 269 [2005]). Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels and Roman, JJ. [Prior Case History: 2011 NY Slip Op 32250(11).]
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 17 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 17

 Approving the renewal of import restrictions contained in the Burmese 
                   Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 26, 2011

Mr. McConnell (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. McCain, and Mr. Durbin) 
  introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
 Approving the renewal of import restrictions contained in the Burmese 
                   Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress approves the 
renewal of the import restrictions contained in section 3(a)(1) and 
section 3A(b)(1) and (c)(1) of the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 
2003.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

# AGENCY:

Rural Housing Service, Department of Agriculture.

# ACTION:

Notice; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Rural Housing Service, Department of Agriculture, published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         of July 16, 2021, concerning request for comments on specifications for the Direct Single Family Housing Loan and Grant Program. The document contained an incorrect number of respondents and total burden hours.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of July 16, 2021, in FR Doc 2021-15117, on page 37732, in the second column, correct the                     *Number of Respondents:*                     to read 248,919 and correct the                     *Total Burden Hours:*                     to read 305,646.                

Levi S. Harrell,

Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer.

[FR Doc. 2021-15900 Filed 7-26-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-XV-P
EXHIBIT 32.1
  
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 19 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 Goldsands Development Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael Stocker, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:
  (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/ Michael Stocker
 Michael Stocker
 (Principal Executive Officer)
 
 Date:   May 12, 2011
  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Goldsands Development Company and will be retained by Goldsands Development Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2019255EN.01004901.xml

| 29.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/49 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/49

---

Action brought on 6 June 2019 — Martínez Albainox v EUIPO — Taser International (TASER)

(Case T-341/19)

(2019/C 255/62)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Martínez Albainox, SL (Albacete, Spain) (represented by: J. Carbonell Callicó, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Taser International, Inc. (Scottsdale, Arizona, United States)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: European Union figurative mark TASER in colours black, yellow and red — European Union trade mark No 12 817 052

Procedure before EUIPO: Cancellation proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 March 2019 in Case R 1577/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision expressly declaring the validity of the European Union trademark No. 12 817 052‘TASER’ (fig.) for all registered goods in class 8; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision expressly declaring the validity of the European Union trademark No. 12 817 052‘TASER’ (fig.) for all registered goods in class 8;

| — | order EUIPO and the intervening party, Taser International, Inc., to pay all the costs of the dispute before the General Court, including those relating to the procedure before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the intervening party, Taser International, Inc., to pay all the costs of the dispute before the General Court, including those relating to the procedure before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 60(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Keith J. BROUSSARD, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-30004

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 22, 2011.

Camille Ann Domingue, Brett L. Gray-son, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Wayne Joseph Blanchard, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before REAVLEY, SMITH and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Keith J. Broussard was charged with mailing a threatening communication to an employee of the Social Security Administration. Broussard threatened to physically injure and forcibly rape the recipient of the communication. Broussard sought a downward departure to a sentence of probation because he suffers from epileptic seizures and was frustrated because he was not granted disability benefits. At sentencing, the district court noted and rejected the arguments for a downward departure. The district court considered the factors contained in 18 U.S.C. Section § 3553(a) and the Sentencing Guidelines. After contemplating these factors, the district court choose a non-guidelines sentence, above the recommended range, and sentenced Broussard to serve five years in prison.

On appeal, Broussard does not challenge any procedural aspect of his sentence, but he argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable considering the § 3553(a) factors and his physical problems. We review sentencing decisions for reasonableness and use the abuse of discretion standard when determining whether a given sentence is in fact reasonable. *United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez,*517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir.2008). A non-guidelines sentence is unreasonable if “it (1) does not account for a factor that should have received significant weight, (2) gives significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or (3) represents a clear error of judgment in balancing the sentencing factors.” *United States v. Smith,*440 F.3d 704, 708 (5th Cir.2006).

The district court made no procedural errors and stated permissible reasons for its choice of sentence. *See Smith,*440 F.3d at 710. Broussard has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion in going above the recommended range and that his sentence is substantively unreasonable.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, June 23, 2015.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of

the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, June 23, 2015

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A15D0422. OKSANA SEPICH v. ARIS PAPADOPOULOS.

Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

2014CV249654
Exhibit 32.1

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 Optical Cable Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that: (1) the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company as of October 31, 2009, and for the period then ended.



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Neil D. Wilkin, Jr.              
|Neil D. Wilkin, Jr.                  
|Chairman of the Board of Directors,  
|President and Chief Executive Officer
|                                     
|January 29, 2010
**Exhibit 15**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Supervisory Board of SAP SE: 

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 333-60399, 333-65083, 333-30380, 333-41762, 333-63496, 333-63464, 333-102564, 333-167870, 333-173782 and 333-190780) on Form S-8 of SAP SE of ourreport dated February 19, 2015, with respect to the consolidated statements of financial position of SAP SE as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, changes in equity, and cash flowsfor each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2014, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014, which report appears in the December 31, 2014 annual report on Form 20-F of SAPSE. 

/s/ KPMG AG 

Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft 

Mannheim, Germany 

March 19, 2015
/ktMr^ l^A^UBTOFGRIWAlAPFiALS APR 06 2915

. , r, <, o ^ i AMAcoste, Clerk 76 7?!? vJJtc/c^s <9-i- 3/HcJ vJbu&X. 7 y/ /&J Qsrfl^ fe),/l,«m 4rd<e*d H\^- To -Z*&^ 'This &£p&-+«l>l<L



### /Us >vk.. #?«J£,e <?£ /^U-ftc^Ai ~7b fernsynih ~rh ^P>? <2a**.td><f<&/*)- "7ir± CW&e_ fez. UcZA?,*?, s4>n>i "TZxas gsaePv rt<^i /Itde £</<fJ.€*£i- 

### <52sk^/'s-feW 6&mJ &fAi»m *Jtj£'sJfh4j^ /iCh#~ '72xa± 5b/z JcfteUk**
(W/rf fridge- hfiiS <$u£<4<^«'c4»cf*v r^k (/JaiU/Z- <^>u^\A^ 15 3*bY/2TJvulUdic^n^ of All fl<Miffr\?t ggAdtzJ?-***, ,fimd •£*#l<\<lri*s/ <**C*p+ 7* <?#&<? 

### hy <p?£ Gm&liht'tyi e/L allte/L /arts cm daw* ^-ftf*- &*«ai, T&'/hidal,dg. 

### A3STMT'Sfa«4~iCMJtJfr <!)',$h^f Ciaufc/ duJ^. MaI I hM£ <fh\ pdaj*XL Can*.}- &$ U)*I/*/l dsu^n-fy u)&Tt <&f /Jak/?^ (U/ZfMSc //&*?- 1MT oti'dq-rmib^fh&&*<$, 0?'aq~/2^£GTx #6, &C *M rfis. P&sc^-Lil. <Ve> *V*£- 7^^/ 0U;//.4-r* Aicft&aJ 4/Un 3Zi UtoUlr^ *'<P ^gflWrn /frtA 12*** dad* 0<jP.(3Aiming {fv&Gsd**.* d&L'3-Q*) S&0 <&£> findzza) /Gib* hfl$ sS^ fed'tOe & ANS^^< dkrm V%F &£e*Hf6>*z~ 

### Ofi-7%?. (hxuarh /5«4 lOj/,Qrn /4*J***J A)/~*> tJwz peaj£u»e rt*ttd£. 7^/*/ -I7t* d&ua./0<F <L/fi»r)»h/>l /Q-ppea.)s I4#s. #6&'&JZ$ hl&

t&'Vii-'Ttfinfc &P"ft* /s^D/sW/ <2e>«*J \ 0*?/* ••- 

### 0)3?, frt+bn 6a>t*>n~/tf <*r) <fhz <^$4??!
id*1 ^fh^Jm-ftpfill A^cJ T^td6m\o^.r 

### CP^i/rf/^e^k (kwY)4ff em f?)£ *£&'stflldrndlfcj ^Jib&iAfiy' Aid- Szplzmb<£/C- (%>^n lOfi//efL d&i&nfy cm "7%2 Jfe/sf' /flanJtfl t&i O&nuAM and \j«ni.\J)ff,4& ««-f ^3«£~n5. *> 

### <M^6/2^a/^ JW ^/<r"T>s-^^i (kw*f Clad ^*^u^ A8jAl«ta-kf«2.

h**\, <7hff>rs Th #z£pcr7\ss- ~7b i/fitt*. /±/-/z,e. -fx£<f*-f?J £Zt>A«AflH ^-^a/S^J-.

Ott^Sfsems- 3? I/&G /)i*f£. /e^ny >£<£i1)£fi cpc**z/,&-»s _£- wr/1 />£ h*npcj Td Addfil<k>J^pzz-,
du/lt&SicJie^ 7>*±\- 'ZPnJ.ACA'b's, fh*\ Thl. XfOt? 7$ &f&ei,( &3u/> f


### OP-fliti-ii &t*tfs kfl&r) 7 4s cf/9cs -fh+4 -ihz <l»hicf 7*yAy 'Tht $*$£ /)a-$ UXll*tw\ thd&suJ A//*^ dW^s Th*-\ TrhH da^a-h Take's Q.,<ihstL../<&£ a4 ~ftfS Vi'&Ia/i&~ Q-P Tkxnt £en*-84i4*f-f0* And'f*tdS' LO,lb*r* Andes*) All 

### lEbfis tf*)e~A 'l0£,t pnislivd <°rh.0 lwdTM\.fb &l*. gW &&r\ ^6'/ SU \\ j8&(p£&4£2/Af 

## Of iil ISO)^