alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019220EN.01001201.xml

| 1.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 220/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 220/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 2 May 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the markkinaoikeus — Finland) — proceedings brought by Oulun Sähkönmyynti Oy

(Case C-294/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Energy efficiency - Directive 2012/27/EU - Article 11(1) - Cost of access to metering and billing information - Right of final customers to receive all their bills and billing information relating to their energy consumption free of charge - Electricity network charges - Discount on electricity network charges granted by an electricity retail sales company to customers who have chosen electronic billing)

(2019/C 220/15)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Markkinaoikeus

Party to the main proceedings

Oulun Sähkönmyynti Oy

Operative part of the judgment

Article 11(1) of Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on energy efficiency, amending Directives 2009/125/EC and 2010/30/EU and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC and 2006/32/EC must be interpreted as not preluding, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings, a discount on electricity network charges granted by an electricity retail sales company exclusively to final customers who have chosen electronic billing.

---

(1)  OJ C 240, 9.7.2018.

---
154 So. 920

#### Addie TRAMMELL v. Ernest E. TRAMMELL.

6 Div. 484.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

April 19, 1934.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
EXHIBIT 32.2





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Hague Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Chris Benjamin, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, that:





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





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





By:
/s/ CHRIS BENJAMINChris Benjamin,Principal Financial OfficerOctober 17, 2011
# C_2017231EN.01004502.xml

| 17.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 231/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 231/45

---

Action brought on 18 May 2017 — Sata v EUIPO — Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools (6000)

(Case T-302/17)

(2017/C 231/57)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Sata GmbH & Co. KG (Kornwestheim, Germany) (represented by: M.-C. Simon, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools Co. Ltd (Pengjie Town, China)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: The sign ‘6000’ — EU trade mark No 13 112 545

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Invalidity proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 March 2017 in Case R 656/2016-4

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs;

| — | in the event that the respondent before the Board of Appeal decides to intervene in the proceedings, order that intervener to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

in the event that the respondent before the Board of Appeal decides to intervene in the proceedings, order that intervener to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of the principle of equal treatment and the principle of sound administration. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of the principle of equal treatment and the principle of sound administration.

---
EXHIBIT F 

Case 1:07-cv-05867-PAC Document 32-4 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-05867-PAC Document 32-4 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 2 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-05867-PAC Document 32-4 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 3 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-05867-PAC Document 32-4 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 4 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-05867-PAC Document 32-4 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 5 of 6
Case 1:07-cv-05867-PAC Document 32-4 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 6 of 6
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2336 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2336

                     One Hundred Sixteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and nineteen

                                 An Act

 
To amend title 11, United States Code, with respect to the definition of 
                           ``family farmer''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
    This Act may be cited as the ``Family Farmer Relief Act of 2019''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF FAMILY FARMER.
    Section 101(18) of title 11, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``$3,237,000'' each place that term appears and inserting 
``$10,000,000''.
SEC. 3. DETERMINATION OF BUDGETARY EFFECTS.
    The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying 
with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by 
reference to the latest statement titled ``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO 
Legislation'' for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional 
Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that 
such statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
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.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Parts 73 and 74 
          - [MM Docket No. 95-31, FCC 00-120] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission. 

# ACTION:

Final rule; announcement of effective date.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Commission adopted new rules for selecting among mutually exclusive applicants for noncommercial educational broadcast stations. Certain rules contained new and modified information collection requirements and were published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on June 8, 2000. This document announces the effective date of these published rules.                     

# DATES:

Effective August 1, 2000 with respect to the amendments to §§ 73.202, 73.3527, and 77.3572 published at 65 FR 36375 (June 8, 2000). 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Irene Bleiweiss, Mass Media Bureau, Audio Services Division, (202) 418-2700. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

On August 1, 2000, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the information collection requirements contained in Sections 73.202; 73.3527; and 73.3572 pursuant to OMB Control Nos. 3060-0948. Accordingly, the information collection requirements contained in these rules became effective on August 1, 2000. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

William F. Caton, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 01-1308 Filed 1-16-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
# Un ited Sta tes C ourt of A ppea ls

For the S eventh Circuit Chicago, Illin ois 60604 July 3, 2002

Before
Hon. RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge Hon. FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge Hon. TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge

No. 01-1973

M ARCUS D IX ON , Appeal from the United States Plaintiff- Appellant

, District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.
v.

T HOM AS P AGE , et al. No. 97-323-GPM Defendants -Appellee

s

. G. Patrick Murphy,

Chief Judge

. 

### ORDER
On June 11, 2002, the defendants filed a motion to amend our opinion of May 28, 2002, asserting that we did not correctly quote a representat ion made at oral argument. Although we do not believe that the quotation in the Opinion was made in error, we believe that the Opinion should be modified in the interest of clarity. Therefore, this Opinion is hereby amended by deleting, on lines 8-9 and 12 of page 9 of the Slip Opinion, th

e bold-faced text: But counsel represented that under the grievance process in Illinois, Dixon could appeal di

rectly to the D irector after waiting for thirty days to be transferred , thus bypassing the initial steps required for the filing of a new grievance. See 20 Ill. Admi n. Code § 50

4.850(a) (1998) ( stating tha t “if after re ceiving a response . . ., the committed person s till feels that the probl em, compl aint or grievan ce has no t been resolved to his or her satisfaction, he or she may appeal in writing to the Director within 30 days after receipt of the response”).Page 2 No. 01-1973

and substituting the following bold-faced text and adding the footnote: But counsel represented that under the grievance process in Illinois, Dixon could appeal di

rectly to the D irector if he had not, in fact, been transferred , thus bypassing the initial steps required for the filing of a new grievance. See 20 Ill. Admin. Cod e § 504.850 (a) (199 8) (stati ng that “if a

fter receivi

ng the response . . ., the committed person s till feels that the probl em, compl aint or grievan ce has no t been resolved to his or her satisfaction, he or she may appeal in writing to the Director within 30 days after receipt of the response”). FN1 FN1. A prisoner in Dixon’s situation may face issues of timing. He must appeal within 30

days of a “re sponse.” The “resp onse” in th e present c ase woul d have to include the failure to act on a decision to transfer, as well as, presumably, the decision itself. (Otherwise, there would be nothing for the prisoner to appeal.) And the date

of the “resp onse” wou ld be dif ficult or impossib le for the pri soner to determine . An immed iate appea l might be p remature si nce the pri son system must be a llowed so me reasona ble time (

but no longe r) to process a transfer decision . Becaus e the prison er won a transfer decis ion, the bu rden shou ld be on the prison s

ystem to ens ure that the p risoner is properly inf

ormed about

when he can appeal a delay in, or reversal of, his promised transfer.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 102 (Friday, May 25, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 28892]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13247]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Office of Arms Control and Nonproliferation; Proposed Subsequent 
Arrangement

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Subsequent arrangement.

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

SUMMARY: This notice has been issued under the authority of section 131 
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2160). The 
Department is providing notice of a proposed ``subsequent arrangement'' 
under the Agreement for Cooperation Concerning Civil Uses of Atomic 
Energy between the United States and Canada and Agreement for 
Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the United 
States and the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM).
    This subsequent arrangement concerns the retransfer of 110,436 kg 
of U.S.-origin natural uranium in the form of uranium hexafluoride, 
74,655 kg of which is uranium, from the Cameco Corporation, Ontario, 
Canada to Urenco Capenhurst, England. The material, which is now 
located at Cameco Corp., Port Hope, Ontario, will be transferred to 
Urenco for toll enrichment. Upon completion of the toll enrichment, the 
material will be transferred to the Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp., 
Burlington, KS for use as fuel. The uranium hexafluoride was originally 
obtained by the Cameco Corp. pursuant to export license number 
XSOU8744.
    In accordance with section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended, we have determined that this subsequent arrangement is not 
inimical to the common defense and security.
    This subsequent arrangement will take effect no sooner than fifteen 
days after the date of publication of this notice.

    Dated: May 21, 2001.

    For the Department of Energy.
Trisha Dedik,
Director, International Policy and Analysis for Arms Control and 
Nonproliferation, Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.
[FR Doc. 01-13247 Filed 5-24-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of BWI Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending december 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jim Can, President
and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
16th day of February, 2009.


/s/ Jim Can
---------------------------
Jim Can
President, CEO
1

The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-3467

___________

H.G. Davis, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

Johnny Wayne Carter, Judge, one and *

all; Faulkner County Quorum Court, * [UNPUBLISHED]

one and all; H. G. Foster, Prosecuting *

Atty, one and all; Marty Montgomery, *

originally sued as Monty Montgomery, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: September 21, 2007

Filed: October 4, 2007

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

H.G. Davis appeals the district court’s1

 order denying his motion to set aside

judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit. We find no abuse of discretion in the

district court’s dismissal of his postjudgment motion as untimely. See Middleton v.
-2-

McDonald, 388 F.3d 614, 616 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review). Accordingly, we

affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-30982

HENRY LEONARD,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

STATE OF LOUISIANA, on behalf of Department of Public Safety and

Corrections; RICHARD STALDER, individually and in his official capacity as

Secretary of the Department of Corrections & Public Safety; VENETIA

MICHAEL, individually and in her official capacity as Warden of David Wade

Correctional Center; JACKIE HAMIL, individually and in his official capacity

as a correctional officer at David Wade Correctional Center,

Defendants - Appellants

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 5:07-CV-813

Before REAVLEY, GARZA, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The judgment of the district court is affirmed for the following reason:

The Final Call is objectionable to the prison officials only because it

regularly includes “The Muslim Program.” We agree with the district court that

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 10, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 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.

Case: 10-30982 Document: 00511661708 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/10/2011
No. 10-30982

banning the entire newspaper is not justified for that reason. While we do not

agree that “The Muslim Program” is free of racially inflammatory language, the

record here does not justify this order under circumstances where an

objectionable page could be deleted and where this page has been included in all

prior issues of the newspaper and is and always has been available to appellee.

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 10-30982 Document: 00511661708 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/10/2011
Exhibit 32.2

Certificate pursuant to 18 U.S. C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In accordance with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, to the best of
my knowledge, hereby certifies that the report of Newnan Coweta Bancshares, Inc., filed on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2006: (1) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and (2) fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of Newnan Coweta Bancshares, Inc.

Date:
March 21, 2007



/s/ Ann B. BledsoeAnn B. Bledsoe,Chief Financial Officer
Eurex Clearing AG 

ECAG Rule Certification 083-22 

November 14, 2023 

1. The text of the proposed amendments to the Clearing Conditions (“Clearing Conditions”) of Eurex 

Clearing AG (“Eurex Clearing”) and Price List (“Price List”) of Eurex Clearing is appended as Attachment 

A. Any additions are underlined and any deletions are struck through. 

2. The date of intended implementation is January 23, 2023. 

3. Attached please find a certification that: (1) these amendments comply with the Commodity Exchange 

Act (the “Act”), and the Commission’s regulations thereunder; and (2) concurrent with the filing of this 

submission, Eurex Clearing is posting a copy of this filing to its website at: https://www.eurex.com/ecen/rules-regs/regulations/cftc-dco-filings. 

4. A concise explanation and analysis of the operation, purpose, and effect of the amended rule appears 

below. 

5. There were no opposing views expressed regarding these amended rules. 

6. Confidential treatment is not requested. 

___________________________________________________________________________________ 

CONCISE EXPLANATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE OPERATION, PURPOSE, AND EFFECT OF 

THE PROPOSED RULE AND ITS COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, 

INCLUDING CORE PRINCIPLES AND THE COMMISSION’S REGULATIONS THEREUNDER 

Eurex Clearing is amending the Clearing Conditions and Price List to reflect the launch of the Three-Month 

Euro STR Futures on Eurex Deutschland, as outlined in Eurex Clearing Circular 027/22, which is appended 

as Attachment A. Eurex Clearing will provide clearing services for this contract. 

For avoidance of doubt, Eurex Clearing clears contracts listed on Eurex Deutschland outside the scope of 

its DCO license, which applies only to swaps. 

Further information regarding the operation, purpose, and effect of the proposed amendments is discussed 

in Attachment A. 

Eurex Clearing has identified the following derivatives clearing organization (“DCO”) Core Principle as 

potentially being relevant to the above amendments: 

1. DCO Core Principle C (Participant and Product Eligibility): The proposed amendments will 

comply with DCO Core Principle C because the amendments list a new contract on Eurex 

Deutschland, which Eurex Clearing clears outside the scope of its DCO license, and all products 

cleared by Eurex Clearing under its DCO license will continue to be subject to appropriate 

standards in compliance with this Core Principle. 
2 

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 5c OF THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT, 7 

U.S.C. §7a-2 AND COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION RULE 40.6, 17 C.F.R. §40.6 

I hereby certify that: 

(1) the amendments comply with the Commodity Exchange Act, and the Commission’s 

regulations thereunder; and 

(2) concurrent with the filing of this submission, Eurex Clearing is posting a copy of thisfiling 

to its website at: https://www.eurex.com/ec-en/rules-regs/regulations/cftc-dco-filings. 

/s/ Eric Seinsheimer 

By: Eric Seinsheimer

Title: US CCO, Eurex Clearing AG 

Dated: November 14, 2022
December 16, 2022

Re: Weekly Notification of Rule Amendments 

– Updates to Risk Parameters Established by 

ICC Pursuant to Section 5c(c)(1) of the 

Commodity Exchange Act and Commission 

Regulation 40.6(d)

VIA ELECTRONIC PORTAL

Mr. Christopher Kirkpatrick

Secretary

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20581

Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick:

ICE Clear Credit (“ICC”) hereby submits, pursuant to Section 5c(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act and 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission”) Regulation 40.6(d), a notification of changes to 

risk parameters established by ICC in consultation with the ICC Risk Committee, Trading Advisory Group 

and/or Risk Working Group. ICC is registered with the Commission as a derivatives clearing organization.

The purpose of this notification is to report any changes to the risk parameters established by ICC. During 

the week ending December 16, 2022, changes were made to the following parameters: 

• bid/offer widths for CDX and iTraxx credit indices and single name risk factors

• concentration charge thresholds for index and single name risk factors

• Kendall Tau rank-order correlations for NA, EU, Asia/Pacific (“AP”), and Emerging Market (“EM”) 

risk factors

• MAD estimates (inclusive of EWMA) for NA, EU, AP, and EM risk factors

• left and right tail parameters for NA, EU, AP, and EM risk factors

ICC has posted a copy of this submission on its website concurrent with this filling. 

ICC would be pleased to respond to any questions the Commission or the staff may have regarding this 

submission. Please direct any questions or requests for information to the attention of the undersigned at 

eric.nield@ice.com (312) 836-6742.

Sincerely,

Eric Nield

General Counsel