alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2005034EN.01000801.xml

| 9.2.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 34/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.2.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 34/8

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(2005/C 34/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

Date of adoption of the decision:

Member State: Germany (Schleswig-Holstein)

Aid No: NN 169/2003 (ex N 430/03)

Title: Aid for destruction of carcasses

Objective: to compensate livestock farmers for the disposal of fallen stock at farm level.

Legal basis: § 6 and §7 des Ausführungsgesetzes zum Tierkörperbeseitigungsgesetz i. V. m. § 44 LHO.

Budget: € 4,6 million

Aid intensity: 100 %

Duration: 1 year (from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2003). For unlawful aid: from 1992 until 31 December 2002.

Other information: The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at

http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state_aids

---
Case 1:07-cv-05776-RJH Document 4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05776-RJH Document 4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the
Quarterly Report of DTLL, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended November 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Stephen C. Roberts, MD, Chief Financial 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:

(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.

|Date:   January 19, 2005 |  |                                               | 
|------------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------- | 
|                         |  | /s/   Stephen C. Roberts, MD                  | 
|                         |  |                                              
|                         |  | Stephen C. Roberts, MDChief Financial Officer | 

---
EXHIBIT 99.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



Brandon Stauber, as Chief Executive Officer of INETEVENTS, INC., a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350,
that

     (1) the Company's Annual Report of Form 10-KSB for the annual period
ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
applicable; 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: April 15, 2003                       /s/ BRANDON STAUBER
                                            __________________________
                                            Brandon Stauber
                                            Chief Executive Officer
                                            INETEVENTS, INC.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 15, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 26873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12118]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Notice of 
Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Environmental Health 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel Review of RFA TW-01-002, 
International Training & Research in Environmental & Occupational 
Health.
    Date: June 13-15, 2001.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Hawthorne Suites, 300 Meredith Drive, Durham, NC 27713.
    Contact Person: Brenda K Weis, Ph.D, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural 
Research and Training, National Institutes of Environmental Health 
Sciences, P.O. Box 12233, MD/EC-30, Research Triangle Park, NC 
27709, 919/541-4964.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Environmental Health 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel Review Meeting for RFA 001-002--
Toxicogenomics.
    Date: June 19-22, 2001.
    Time: 7 p.m. to 12 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Radisson Governors Inn, I-40 and Davis Dr., Exit 280, 
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
    Contact Person: Linda K. Bass, Ph.D, Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, 
P.O. Box 12233, MD EC-30, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, (919) 
541-1307.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.113, 
Biological Response to Environmental Response to Environmental 
Health Hazards; 93.114, Applied Toxicological Research and Testing; 
93.115, Biometry and Risk Estimation--Health Risks from 
Environmental Exposures; 93.142, NIEHS Hazardous Waste Worker Health 
and Safety Training; 93.143, NIEHS Superfund Hazardous Substances--
Basic Research and Education; 93.894, Resources and Manpower 
Development in the Environmental Health Sciences, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: May 4, 2001.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 01-12118 Filed 5-14-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 6 Filed 02/05/2008 Page 1 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 6 Filed 02/05/2008 Page 2 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 6 Filed 02/05/2008 Page 3 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 6 Filed 02/05/2008 Page 4 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 6 Filed 02/05/2008 Page 5 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05425-AKH Document 6 Filed 02/05/2008 Page 6 of 6
# C_2017178EN.01002202.xml

| 6.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 178/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/22

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 6 April 2017 — Le Pen v Parliament

(Case T-86/17 R)

((Interim measures - Member of the European Parliament - Recovery by offsetting of allowances paid as reimbursement of parliamentary assistance expenses - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency))

(2017/C 178/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Marion Anne Perrine Le Pen (Saint-Cloud, France) (represented by: M. Ceccaldi and J.-P. Le Moigne, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: G. Corstens and S. Seyr, acting as agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking the suspension of the operation of the decision of the Secretary-General of the Parliament of 5 December 2016 declaring that the sum of EUR 298 497,87 had been unduly paid to the applicant and had to be recovered from her as well as debit note No 2016-1560 of 6 December 2016 adopted pursuant to that decision.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
# C_2022463EN.01002201.xml

| 5.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 463/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 463/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 28 September 2022 — Leino-Sandberg v Parliament

(Case T-421/17 RENV) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Document relating to a decision refusing a third party full access to trilogue tables relating to the proposal for a regulation of the Parliament and of the Council on Europol and repealing Decisions 2009/371/JHA and 2005/681/JHA - Refusal to grant access - Second indent of Article 4(2) of Regulation No 1049/2001 - Exception for the protection of court proceedings and legal advice)

(2022/C 463/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Päivi Leino-Sandberg (Helsinki, Finland) (represented by: O. Brouwer, B. Verheijen and S. Schubert, lawyers)

Defendant): European Parliament (represented by: N. Görlitz and J.C. Puffer, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the applicant: Republic of Finland (represented by: M. Pere, acting as Agent), Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: C. Meyer-Seitz, H. Shev, H. Eklinder, A. Runeskjöld, M. Salborn Hodgson and R. Shahsavan Eriksson, acting as Agents)

Re:

By her action based on Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of Decision A(2016) 15112 of the European Parliament of 3 April 2017 refusing to grant her access to Decision A(2015) 4931 of the Parliament of 8 July 2015 addressed to Mr Emilio De Capitani.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Decision A(2016) 15112 of the European Parliament of 3 April 2017 refusing to grant Ms Päivi Leino-Sandberg access to Decision A(2015) 4931 of the Parliament of 8 July 2015 addressed to Mr Emilio De Capitani; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Decision A(2016) 15112 of the European Parliament of 3 April 2017 refusing to grant Ms Päivi Leino-Sandberg access to Decision A(2015) 4931 of the Parliament of 8 July 2015 addressed to Mr Emilio De Capitani;

| 2. | Orders the Parliament to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Ms Päivi Leino-Sandberg; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Parliament to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Ms Päivi Leino-Sandberg;

| 3. | Orders the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to bear their own respective costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden to bear their own respective costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 293, 4.9.2017.

---
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32.2

              Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                          as adopted Pursuant to
               Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of CalbaTech, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward Deese, CFO,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes Oxley Act, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The Information contained in the Report fairly represents, in all material
aspects, the financial condition and result of operations on the Company.


By: /s/ Edward Deese
------------------------
Edward Deese, CFO
I . 

,*‘, 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 
, 

tc forfeit the ro8ognLsssn for tb Aofondant, or to t8ttm 

c)~pit~e f0r tm d0ruda5ts. u UL a~~fi~n wen8t hi6 pr0- 

puty ta uafoxw the #aQmnt of t& oourt, Y if a0 eppod bad been tama,w 

&ticl* 864, cod. of .mlBiMl PlQoouur8 plwldu nn 

appealmybotakonbythe bfon4natfmtoreryflnel dudsl m3t rmlQar6d 

T 

n6?66oe;ni6a64, ballbondorkndtakan 

ror the prevent 0n 0r ouppresei~n of 0rfa808, rbua 6w 

o*~;s for $80.00 or -8, oxoluai~o of mwtr, but sot 

In I& g to sta t., 4 a a . w. sa o t, he l o uit up ; 

-Aftor ea r dina g lmnb a $ni*, b lo tlo a OEn 

k tnMn1n thooourt klcm,eurptto fa*c 

felt tb a reeognls~nee for tha defendant, or to 

t6inu 8 o a p lafe or h im u en l x o eutloRgalat Il 

h l8 prop a r ty, o o nfo r e. thE &dgalont, o f uib 

+o tvt.* 

Is ox plrte Ekllabury, NS 6. W. 696, tha aurt 8aym: 

91% the facts revanleb by the prosat 

roeord, at the t1!6, the wdats WElI filed, 1t 

N the prirllege 05 tha stab to u~forao tb 

$at@amt by mlting the ajqellent uodor a 

eapfas profine, by iorfoitfag tha roao~izanae, 

by pro666clne;6e6ln6tur6ti66 orb&mu&~~ 

ueoutlon agnl.rl6t hi6 pmport 

T. state, 45 Tu. cr. Appa. t 3 6. 0'. lou; b 

duty or pmouding by one of th666 6nthcd6 

u&6 upon the 0fflOon of the H&O. A QltJ 

llkouin nrtad upon the appnlJ.ult, and th 

marotiu upon hi6-noognlsaMa. &a aght 

bnn paia tb fina of orirmdued hIsell; ac 

might the 6urety. tina or tlu 0rfi0t3x-8 0f 

the rtate had the right to efflr0etiTezg hlms8 the appellant or Bl?llgl the 6tfd'B rigma 

to the 6etl6raat.lan 0s the Juugfmt 0r the 

oourt.* 

xnJohnscnT . State, X2 8. t. 406, the oourt mysr 

"In edor to dofont WI obligation 

founded on Artlole 8S4, Cods oi Crilinal prouQun, (1899) tb epp&iwtmt'odl~k 

ptot3emed dth dr08t, but the 6tiplilPtd fh8 

and twote wt alec bo paid.- 
Honorable R. T-. BuA6, Mhy ;n, lS39, l%ge 8 

you inqti2-d if rrder hthh a64 0t the c0d0 0r 

G~nal~OdUW~thO defendmtsy 6StiS~hiS?WOgniSRRUE by payiafi the l OStS. v 0 ezwu no for the nasun 

thct hrtiale 864 &ocs notbin& maw then 

and t&t radar Art.1~1~ 439, Cob of Cr 

g-P:? 

the 0ouI-t has D:: dl8orotloa uuloss the prfnoiI*ll appad or 

be arrest& en12 loCi;eS In JaflI22uhloh wmttlm Oourtmay 

auulsa 4.isamtlon, mil t&t in the lmguag~ of fohnsca 'I. 

atate, SupmA, 

Im order to aer*r,t M ohllgRt1on iandod on Art&oh 8E4 ll8791, cods of criaLn*J. 

?mumdun, the appeal iauetnotonly be prwol utod with atfeot, but the otip;lated flno 

ud 606tS wt d60 be paiiid.’ 

t
#### Patricia Lynn N., Respondent, v Vincent Michael N., Appellant.

In a matrimonial action in which the parties were divorced by judgment dated October 20, 1986, the defen*548dant husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Delaney, J.), entered February 2, 1988, as granted a motion by the plaintiff wife for leave to enter a money judgment for accrued arrears of pendente lite maintenance and child support.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the Supreme Court may enforce a pendente lite order granting maintenance or child support by granting leave to enter a money judgment for arrears pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 244, even where the application for such relief is made after the entry of the final judgment in the matrimonial action *(see, Siddiqui v Siddiqui,*118 AD2d 846, 847; *Treheme-Thomas v TreherneThomas,*267 App Div 509; *Wormley v Wormley,*267 App Div 85; *see also, Mazer v Mazer,*276 App Div 733, *mod on other grounds*301 NY 774; *White v White,*205 Misc 1042; 19A Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 118:111). This rule must be distinguished from the rule which precludes enforcement of a pendente lite order by way of civil contempt after the termination of the matrimonial action *(see, Polizotti v Polizotti,*305 NY 176, *revg*280 App Div 229; *Weaver v Weaver,*72 AD2d 221; *Prothers v Prothers,*283 App Div 747; *Mittman v Mitt-man,*263 App Div 384; 19A Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 118:111). To the extent that this distinction was not observed in the decision of this court in *Sorkin v Sorkin*(111 AD2d 845, 846), we overrule. that case. Further, we decline to follow the decision of the Appellate Division, First Department, in *Per-, rotta v Perrotta*(149 AD2d 317). We have examined the appellant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.
55 WATER STREET

DTCC Data Repository =e

February 5, 2021

By Electronic Submission

Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

Secretary

Commodity Futures Trading Commission
1155 21* Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Re: Weekly Notification of Rule Amendments

Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick:

Pursuant to Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) Regulation § 40.6(d), DTCC Data
Repository (U.S.) LLC (“DDR”) submits this Weekly Notification of the following rule amendment issued
during the week of February 1, 2021:

e DDR has amended its Fee Schedule for CFTC Reporting (the “Fee Schedule”) to correct
typographical errors in the Credit, Equities and Interest Rates Chart of the Fee Schedule to reflect
the proper Tier 9 threshold of 1,250,000.

A copy of the Fee Schedule is available on DDR’s public website and may be accessed at:
https://www.dtcc.com/repository-and-derivatives-services/repository-services/cftc.

If you have any questions or need further information, please contact me at 813 470-1447 or via email at
kromig@dtcc.com.

Sincerely,

a

Kyle Romig
Director and Assistant General Counsel
# C_2018408EN.01005402.xml

| 12.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 408/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 408/54

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 September 2018 — Ghost — Corporate Management v EUIPO (Dry Zone)

(Case T-488/17) (1)

((EU trade mark - Application for the EU word mark Dry Zone - Period for bringing an action - Lateness - Inadmissibility of the appeal brought before the Board of Appeal - Article 60 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 68 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - No force majeure or unforeseeable circumstances - Obligations of care and diligence - Legitimate expectations))

(2018/C 408/70)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Ghost — Corporate Management SA (Lisbon, Portugal) (represented by: S. de Barros Araújo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 June 2017 (Case R 683/2017-2) concerning an application for registration of the word sign Dry Zone as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Ghost — Corporate Management SA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ghost — Corporate Management SA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 309, 18.9.2017.

---
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 Annual Report of CoroWare, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lloyd T. Spencer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to CoroWare, Inc. and will be retained by CoroWare, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





|                   |     |                                                                                                                                                                         
|------------------ | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                   |     |                                                                                                                                                                         
|Date: May 15, 2009 | By: | /s/ Lloyd T. Spencer                                                                                                                                                    
|                   |     | Lloyd T. Spencer
Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
cmes¢

Chicago Mercantile Exchange

20 South Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606-7499
www.cme.com

August 8, 2006

Ms. Eileen Donovan

Acting Secretary of the Commission
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21" Street, NW

Washington, DC 20581

RE: CME Rule 408.C. ("Conduct of Hearings — Settlement Offers”)
Submission No. 06-69

Dear Ms. Donovan:

Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (“CME” or “Exchange") hereby notifies the Commission that
the Exchange has approved amendments to Rule 408.C. to clarify that settlement offers unsupported
by the Market Regulation Department may not be submitted to a Panel of CME's Business Conduct
Committee for consideration prior to the issuance of charges by CME's Probable Cause Commtitee.
Previously the rule did not clearly state that unsupported settlement offers cannot be submitted to the
Business Conduct Committee prior to the issuance of charges by the Probable Cause Committee.

The Exchange certifies that this program neither violates nor is inconsistent with any provision
of the Commodity Exchange Act or of the rules and regulations thereunder.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at (312) 338-2861.

Sincerely,

/S/ Stephen M. Szarmack
Director and Associate General Counsel

enc,


408.

CONDUCT OF HEARINGS

[Sections A and B are unchanged.]
408.C. Settlement Offers

A respondent that is the subject of an investigation or charges may submit for consideration by the Panel a
written offer of settlement in disposition of such investigation or charges. A respondent may submit a settlement
offer without admitting or denying the rule violations upon which the penalty is based; provided, however, that an
offer must include a consent to entry of findings by the Panel regarding the conduct and rule violations at issue
and to the penalty to be imposed.
If the Market Regulation Department does not oppose the respondent's offer of settlement, the respondent's
written offer of settlement and the Market Regulation Department's supporting statement shall be submitted to
the Panel for consideration.
If the Market Regulation Department opposes the respondent's offer of settlement, then following the issuance of
any charaes by the PCC, the respondent's, may submit a written offer of settlement andthe-Market Regulation
shall-be—submittedtofor_ consideration by the Panel—for-consideration. In
considering whether to accept the respondent's offer, the Panel shall examine the respondent's written offer of
settlement, the Market Regulation Department's written opposition _ thereto, and the investigation reportevidence
preseniedtothe-PGC with respect to such matter.

[The remainder of the Rule is unchanged.]