alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Harold Fairclough, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lombardo, J.), rendered December 14, 1983, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

By failing to make a motion to the court of first instance to withdraw his plea or vacate his conviction, defendant has failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of the sufficiency of his plea allocution *(see, People v Hoke,*62 NY2d 1022; *People v Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636). In any event, there is no merit to defendant’s contention regarding the plea allocution. Defendant’s statements made it clear that he had no reasonable possibility of successfully raising a defense of agency *(see, People v Argibay,*45 NY2d 45, 53-54). Thus, Criminal Term had no duty to make further inquiry about this possible defense before accepting defendant’s guilty plea. The allocution established the requisite element of criminal *587sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and defendant knowingly and intelligently pleaded guilty thereto *(see, People v Harris,*61 NY2d 9).

The sentence imposed was not unduly harsh or excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80; *People v Kazepis,*101 AD2d 816, 817). Gibbons, J. P., Thompson, Brown and Eiber, JJ., concur.
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 130

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a credit for the

purchase of child restraint systems used in motor vehicles.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 21, 1997

Mr. INOUYE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide

a credit for the purchase of child restraint systems used

in motor vehicles.

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

3 SECTION 1. CREDIT FOR PURCHASE OF CHILD RESTRAINT

4 SYSTEMS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subpart A of part IV of sub6 chapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of

7 1986 (relating to nonrefundable personal credits) is

8 amended by adding at the end the following:
2

•S 130 IS

1 ‘‘SEC. 25A. PURCHASE OF CHILD RESTRAINT SYSTEM.

2 ‘‘(a) GENERAL RULE.—In the case of an individual,

3 there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed

4 by this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to

5 the costs incurred by the taxpayer during such taxable

6 year in purchasing a qualified child restraint system for

7 any child of the taxpayer.

8 ‘‘(b) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section—

9 ‘‘(1) QUALIFIED CHILD RESTRAINT SYSTEM.—

10 The term ‘qualified child restraint system’ means

11 any child restraint system which meets the require12 ments of section 571.213 of title 49 of the Code of

13 Federal Regulations.

14 ‘‘(2) CHILD.—The term ‘child’ has the meaning

15 given the term in section 151(c)(3).’’.

16 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sec17 tions for subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter

18 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by

19 inserting after the item relating to section 25 the follow20 ing:

‘‘Sec. 25A. Purchase of child restraint system.’’.

21 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

22 this section apply to taxable years beginning after Decem23 ber 31, 1996.

Æ
NOTIFY TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION







EXHIBIT 99.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Paul
DePond, 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 Notify Technology Corporation on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2002 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 on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of Notify Technology Corporation.





By:

/s/    PAUL F.
DEPONDName:    Paul F. DePond Title:    Chief Executive Officer





I, Gerald W. Rice, 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 Notify Technology Corporation on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2002 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 on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Notify Technology Corporation.





By:

/s/    GERALD W.
RICEName:    Gerald W. Rice Title:    Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2



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, 2004 (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 4, 2004 |  | /s/ David J. Wagner
|                     |  | Name:               |  | David J. Wagner        
|                     |  | Title:              |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### Augustin Mugabo, Appellant, v City of Buffalo, Respondent.

[942 NYS2d 853]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Frederick J. Marshall, J.), entered October 1, 2010. The order denied the pro se motion of plaintiff for leave to renew and reargue his prior summary judgment motion and his opposition to defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff appeals from an order denying his pro se motion for leave to renew and reargue his prior motion for summary judgment on the amended complaint and his opposition to defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint. As plaintiff conceded during oral argument on his motion for leave to renew and reargue, he offered no new facts in support thereof. Instead, plaintiff merely argued that Supreme Court had misapprehended the law and therefore reached the wrong conclusion with respect to the prior motion and cross motion. Thus, plaintiffs motion for leave to renew and reargue was actually only a motion for leave to reargue, and it is well settled that no appeal lies from an order denying such a motion *(see Hill v Milan,*89 AD3d 1458, 1458 [2011]; *Hilliard v Highland Hosp.,*88 AD3d 1291, 1292-1293 [2011]; *Schaner v Mercy Hosp. of Buffalo,*16 AD3d 1095, 1096 [2005]). The appeal therefore must be dismissed. Present— Smith, J.P., Fahey, Peradotto and Lindley, JJ.
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 1 of 29 PageID #:160
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 2 of 29 PageID #:161
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 3 of 29 PageID #:162
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 4 of 29 PageID #:163
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 5 of 29 PageID #:164
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 6 of 29 PageID #:165
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 7 of 29 PageID #:166
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 8 of 29 PageID #:167
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 9 of 29 PageID #:168
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 10 of 29 PageID #:169
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 11 of 29 PageID #:170
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 12 of 29 PageID #:171
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 13 of 29 PageID #:172
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 14 of 29 PageID #:173
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 15 of 29 PageID #:174
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 16 of 29 PageID #:175
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 17 of 29 PageID #:176
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 18 of 29 PageID #:177
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 19 of 29 PageID #:178
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 20 of 29 PageID #:179
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 21 of 29 PageID #:180
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 22 of 29 PageID #:181
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 23 of 29 PageID #:182
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 24 of 29 PageID #:183
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 25 of 29 PageID #:184
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 26 of 29 PageID #:185
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 27 of 29 PageID #:186
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 28 of 29 PageID #:187
Case: 1:03-cv-02702 Document #: 13 Filed: 10/10/03 Page 29 of 29 PageID #:188
Minute Order Form (06/97)

United States District Court, Northern District of Hlinois

N: of Assigned Jud; 7 i Sitting Judge if Othe:
mor MaghstrateJuage | __ Samuel Der-Yeghiayan than Assigned Sudge
CASE NUMBER 03 C 2741 DATE 3/31/2004
CASE Mitsui Sumitomo Ins vs. Watkins Mtr Line Inc
TITLE

[ln the following box (a) indicate the party filing the motion, e.g., plaintiff, defendant, 3rd party plaintiff, and (b) state briefly the nature

of the motion being presented.)

MOTION:

DOCKET ENTRY:

(1) o Filed motion of [ use listing in “Motion” box above.]

(2) oO Brief in support of motion due

(3) oO Answer bricfto motion due___. Reply to answer briefdue___

(4) o Ruling/Hearingon set for__— at

(5) o Status hearing[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at

(6) Oo Pretrial conference[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at.

(7) a Trial{set for/re-set for]on_ at.

(8) Qo [Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continued to at

(9) im This case is dismissed [with/without] prejudice and without costs[by/agreement/pursuant to]
OOFRCP4(m) Ci Local Rule 41.1 OFRCP41(a)(1) O FRCP41(a)(2).

(10) MM [Otherdocketentry] For the reasons stated on the reverse side of this minute order, the Court denies

ah

the cross motions for summary judgment [8-1], [13-1] without prejudice. Furthermore, the Court strikes
as moot plaintiff's motion to strike the affidavit of Bob Fredere [22-1]. Status hearing set for 04/12/04
to stand. Enter Memorandum Opinion.

a [For further detail see order on the reverse side of the original minute order.]

No notices required, advised in open court.
No notices required.

Notices mailed by judge's staff.

Notified counsel by telephone.

Docketing to mail notices.

Mail AO 450 form.

Copy to judge/magistrate judge.

courtroom
maw
initials

deputy's tel

Docunient

Date/time received in

date mailed notice

mailing deputy initials

central Clerk's Office


(Reserved for use by the Court)

ORDER

This matter is before the court on cross motions for summary judgment. Defendant
entitled their motion as a partial motion for summary judgment. However, it is not clear
from Defendant’s motion and argument the extent for which Watkins is seeking summary
judgment. On one hand, Defendant appears to be seeking summary judgment on the issue
of limited liability and on the other hand they seem to be challenging whether they are liable
at all on the Plaintiff's claim. For example, in Defendant’s prayer for relief, Defendant
“._ requests that this Court enter an Order granting its Motion for Partial Summary J judgment,
limiting its liability, if any, to $10,150.00 and order such other relief as it deems just and
proper...”. (emphasis added) Therefore, for the purposes of clarification, we deny the cross
motions for summary judgment without prejudice. As such, the court strikes as moot
Mitsui’s motion to strike the affidavit of Bob Fredere. If the parties wish to renew the

motions they may do so.
Exhibit 32.1








SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER





The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of Logitech International S.A. (“the Company”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.





Gerald P. Quindlen, the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Erik K. Bardman, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each certify that, to the best of his knowledge:





(1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and





(2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








August 9, 2010














/s/ Gerald P. Quindlen


Gerald P. Quindlen

President and

Chief Executive Officer

















/s/ Erik K. Bardman


Erik K. Bardman

Senior Vice President, Finance

and Chief Financial Officer
734 A.2d 1275

#### COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. Mark K. HOAK, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Submitted Feb. 24, 1999.

Decided Aug. 19, 1999.

Veronica Anzalone Smith, Grove City, for Mark K. Hoak.

James P. Epstein, Mercer, for Com. of Pennsylvania.

Before FLAHERTY, C.J., and ZAPPALA, CAPPY, CASTILLE, NIGRO and NEWMAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 19th day of August, 1999, the Court being evenly divided, the Order of the Superior Court is affirmed.

Justices CAPPY, CASTILLE and NEWMAN would affirm.

Chief Justice FLAHERTY and Justices ZAPPALA and NIGRO would reverse.

Justice SAYLOR did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
EXHIBIT 23.1



                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



Our report on our audit of the consolidated financial statements of Manhattan
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2002 and for
the years then ended and on the consolidated statements of operations, changes
in stockholders' equity and cash flows for the period from August 6, 2001 (date
of inception) to December 31, 2003, included in this Annual Report on Form
10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, is dated February 14, 2004. We
consent to the incorporation by reference of our report in the following
Registration Statements previously filed by the Company with the Securities and
Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933: the Registration
Statements on Forms S-3 with SEC File Nos. 333-34379, 333-35079, 333-65393,
333-40916, and 333-49036 and the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 with SEC
file Nos. 333-15807, 333-112888, 333-112889 and 333-48531.



                                                /s/ J.H. Cohn LLP

Roseland, New Jersey
March 30, 2004
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:372
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 2 of 16 PageID #:373
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 3 of 16 PageID #:374
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 4 of 16 PageID #:375
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 5 of 16 PageID #:376
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 6 of 16 PageID #:377
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 7 of 16 PageID #:378
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 8 of 16 PageID #:379
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 9 of 16 PageID #:380
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 10 of 16 PageID #:381
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 11 of 16 PageID #:382
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 12 of 16 PageID #:383
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 13 of 16 PageID #:384
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 14 of 16 PageID #:385
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 15 of 16 PageID #:386
Case: 1:02-cv-08801 Document #: 31 Filed: 01/28/03 Page 16 of 16 PageID #:387
Exhibit 4.1


 


Advisors Asset Management, Inc.

18925 Base Camp Road

Monument, Colorado 80132


August 6, 2021


 


Advisors Disciplined Trust 2084


c/o The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee


240 Greenwich Street, 22W Floor


New York, NY 10286


 


Re: Advisors Disciplined Trust 2084 (the “Fund”)


Ladies and Gentlemen:


We have examined the Registration
Statement File No. 333-257952 for the above captioned Fund. We hereby consent to the use in the Registration Statement of the references
to Advisors Asset Management, Inc. as evaluator.


You are hereby authorized
to file a copy of this letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 	 
	 	Advisors Asset Management, Inc.
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By	/s/ ALEX R. MEITZNER
	 	 	Alex R. Meitzner
	 	 	Senior Vice President
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 150 (Monday, August 9, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 43576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16802]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM


Form Submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for 
Extension of Clearance

AGENCY: Selective Service System.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The following form has been submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for extension of clearance without change 
in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

SSS Form 1

    Title: The Selective Service System Registration Form.
    Purpose: Is used to register men and establish a data base for use 
in identifying manpower to the military services during a national 
emergency.
    Respondents: All 18-year-old males who are United States citizens 
and those male immigrants residing in the United States at the time of 
their 18th birthday are required to register with the Selective Service 
System.
    Frequency: Registration with the Selective Service System is a one-
time occurrence.
    Burden: A burden of two minutes or less on the individual 
respondent.
    Copies of the above identified form can be obtained upon written 
request to the Selective Service System, Operations Directorate, 1515 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22209-2425. Written comments and 
recommendations for the proposed extension of clearance without change 
of the form should be sent within 30 days of the publication of this 
notice to the Selective Service System, Operations Directorate, 1515 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22209-2425.
    A copy of the comments should be sent to the Office of Information 
and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer, Selective Service 
System, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, 
Room 3235, Washington, DC 20503.

Thomas T. Devine,
Deputy Associate Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 2021-16802 Filed 8-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8015-01-P
**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 Emeritus Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”), I, Daniel R.
Baty, 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
      Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
      and
 
 2.
    The
      information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.
 
 
 
 /s/    Daniel
R. Baty
 Daniel R.
Baty
 Chief
Executive Officer
 March 30,
2005
# Official Journal C 75/2018

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 75 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6128 February 2018 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 75

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6128 February 2018

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 75/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8775 — Shell/Impello) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2018/C 75/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.8775 — Shell/Impello) (
  1
  )

1

1

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 75/02 | Euro exchange rates | 2 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2018/C 75/02

Euro exchange rates

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 75/03 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8810 — Ardian/DRT) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 3 |
| 2018/C 75/04 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8728 — Diamond Transmission Corporation/InfraRed Capital Partners/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 5 |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 75/05 | Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 6 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2018/C 75/03

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8810 — Ardian/DRT) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

3

2018/C 75/04

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8728 — Diamond Transmission Corporation/InfraRed Capital Partners/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

5

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2018/C 75/05

Publication of an application pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs

6

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN