alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019319EN.01001801.xml

| 23.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 319/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 319/18

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019 — Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission, Eurofer, Association européenne de l’acier, ASBL

(Case C-436/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Dumping - Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 - Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 - Article 2(7)(a) - Normal value - Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country - Selection of the appropriate third country - Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation - Adjustments)

(2019/C 319/19)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd (represented by: E. Vermulst and J. Cornelis, advocaten)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J.-F. Brakeland and A. Demeneix, acting as Agents), Eurofer, Association européenne de l’acier, ASBL (represented by: J. Killick, Barrister, and G. Forwood and C. Van Haute, avocates)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 341, 24.9.2018.

---
# C_2017424EN.01005502.xml

| 11.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 424/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 424/55

---

Action brought on 19 October 2017 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-718/17)

(2017/C 424/80)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and P. Gentili, avvocato dello Stato)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Notice of Open Competitions — Administrators and assistants in the buildings sector — EPSO/AD/342/17 (AD 6) — Building management engineers (including environmental and services engineers) — EPSO/AST/141/17 (AST 3) — Profile 1. Building construction coordinators/technicians — Profile 2. Building coordinators/technicians in air conditioning and electromechanical and electrical engineering — Profile 3. Occupational safety/building safety assistants, published in
  Official Journal of the European Union No C 242 A of 27 July 2017; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Notice of Open Competitions — Administrators and assistants in the buildings sector — EPSO/AD/342/17 (AD 6) — Building management engineers (including environmental and services engineers) — EPSO/AST/141/17 (AST 3) — Profile 1. Building construction coordinators/technicians — Profile 2. Building coordinators/technicians in air conditioning and electromechanical and electrical engineering — Profile 3. Occupational safety/building safety assistants, published in
  Official Journal of the European Union No C 242 A of 27 July 2017;

Official Journal of the European Union

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

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are those set out in Case T-695/17, Italian Republic v Commission.

Italian Republic

Commission

---
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2506 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2506

  To direct the Secretary of Labor to remove travel agencies from the 
    partial list of establishments having no retail concept for the 
 purposes of certain exemptions under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 
                                 1938.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 2, 2019

     Mr. Rooney of Florida (for himself, Ms. Titus, and Mr. Biggs) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                          Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To direct the Secretary of Labor to remove travel agencies from the 
    partial list of establishments having no retail concept for the 
 purposes of certain exemptions under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 
                                 1938.

    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 ``Travel Advisor Retail Fairness 
Act''.

SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF TRAVEL AGENCIES.

    (a) Change of Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall revise the 
regulations set forth in section 779.317 of title 29, Code of Federal 
Regulations, to remove travel agencies from the partial list of 
establishments having no retail concept.
    (b) Interim Effect.--Until the Secretary completes the revisions 
required by subsection (a) and notwithstanding section 779 of title 29, 
Code of Federal Regulations, a travel agency shall not be considered an 
establishment having no retail concept for the purposes of certain 
exemptions under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
                                 <all>
```
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2419 

To provide for nuclear weapons abolition and economic conversion in accordance with District of Columbia Initiative Measure Number 37 of 1992, 

while ensuring environmental restoration and clean-energy conversion. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 30, 2019 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on Armed 

Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To provide for nuclear weapons abolition and economic conversion in accordance with District of Columbia Initiative 

Measure Number 37 of 1992, while ensuring environmental restoration and clean-energy conversion. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Nuclear Weapons Abo5 lition and Economic and Energy Conversion Act of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2419 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT FOR NUCLEAR WEAPONS ABOLI2 TION AND ECONOMIC AND ENERGY CONVER3 SION. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The United States Government 

5 shall— 

6 (1) provide leadership by signing and ratifying 

7 the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nu8 clear Weapons or any other international agreement 

9 that provides for— 

10 (A) the dismantlement and elimination of 

11 all nuclear weapons in every country; and 

12 (B) strict and effective international con13 trol of such dismantlement and elimination; 

14 (2) redirect resources that are being used for 

15 nuclear weapons programs to use— 

16 (A) in converting all nuclear weapons in17 dustry processes, plants, and programs, and in 

18 retraining employees, to shift to a constructive, 

19 ecologically beneficial peace economy, which in20 cludes strict control of all fissile material and 

21 radioactive waste; and 

22 (B) in addressing human and infrastruc23 ture needs, including development and deploy24 ment of sustainable carbon-free and nuclear25 free energy sources, health care, housing, edu26 cation, agriculture, and environmental restoraVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:22 May 03, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2419.IH H2419

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 2419 IH

1 tion, including long-term radioactive waste mon2 itoring; and 

3 (3) actively promote policies to induce all other 

4 countries to join in the commitments described in 

5 this subsection to create a more peaceful and secure 

6 world. 

7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Paragraph (2) of subsection 

8 (a) shall take effect on the date on which the President 

9 certifies to Congress that all countries possessing nuclear 

10 weapons have begun the elimination of such weapons 

11 under established legal requirements comparable to those 

12 described in paragraph (1) of such subsection. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
# C_2017357EN.01002201.xml

| 23.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 357/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 357/22

---

Action brought on 7 August 2017 — Taberna Ángel Sierra and Others v SRB

(Case T-525/17)

(2017/C 357/29)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Taberna Ángel Sierra, SL (Madrid, Spain) and 67 other applicants (represented by: P. Rúa Sobrino, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | Annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the contested decision;

| — | Declare Articles 18 and 29 of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 illegal and inapplicable; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare Articles 18 and 29 of Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 illegal and inapplicable;

| — | Order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Single Resolution Board to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The present action concerns Decision SRB/EES/2017/08 of the Single Resolution Board of 7 June 2017 allowing the resolution of the Banco Popular Español, S.A.

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Single Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.

Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos

Single Resolution Board

Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL

Single Resolution Board

Comercial Vascongada Recalde

Commission and Single Resolution Board

García Suárez and Others

Commission and Single Resolution Board

Fidesban and Others

Single Resolution Board

Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015

Commission and Single Resolution Board

Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda

Commission and Single Resolution Board

---
#### UNION CARBIDE CORP. v. OFFERMAN

No. 453PA98

Case below: 130 N.C.App. 761

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 allowed 30 December 1998 for the limited purpose of remanding to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of *Polaroid Corp. v. Muriel Offerman,*349 N.C. 290, — S.E.2d -, - (1998). Conditional petition by plaintiff for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 30 December 1998.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

ERIC BERNARD SIMMONS, 

Trust, ERIC BERNARD 

SIMMONS, Trustee,

Plaintiffs Below,

Appellants,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE,

Defendant Below,

Appellee.

§

§ No. 425, 2022

§

§

§ Court Below–Superior Court

§ of the State of Delaware

§ 

§ 

§ C.A. No. N22C-05-147

§ 

§

§

§

Submitted: January 10, 2023

Decided: January 13, 2023

ORDER

On December 21, 2022, the Senior Court Clerk issued a notice, sent by 

certified mail, directing the appellants to show cause why this appeal should not be 

dismissed for their failure to pay the Supreme Court filing fee or file a motion to 

proceed in forma pauperis. The appellants received the notice, as evidenced by the 

certified return receipt filed with the Court on December 28, 2022. A timely 

response to the notice to show cause was due on or before January 10, 2023. To 

date, the appellants have not paid the Supreme Court filing fee, filed a motion to 

proceed in forma pauperis, or responded to the notice to show cause. Dismissal of 

this action is therefore deemed to be unopposed.
2

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, under Supreme Court 

Rules 3(b)(2) and 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura

Justice
#### Larry CHAVIS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. State of NORTH CAROLINA, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 05-7555.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 17, 2006.

Decided: June 8, 2006.

Larry Chavis, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Wallaee-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

*340Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Larry Chavis seeks to appeal the district court’s order granting the Respondent’s motion for summary judgment and denying relief on Chavis’ 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition as time-barred. This order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Chavis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SinoHub, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the quarter ending September 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Henry T.
Cochran, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to his 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.








Dated:
      November 16, 2009
            By:
            /s/
      Henry T. CochranHenry
      T. CochranChief
      Executive Officer
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY-ACT OF 2002



I, Bradley D. Slye, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Electro-Sensors, Inc., certify that:



1.
        I have reviewed this report on Form 10-KSB of Electro-Sensors Inc.;




2.
        Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;




3.
        Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;




4.
        I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:




(a)    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)    Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)    Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and



5.
        I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):




(a)    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.





March 23, 2007
        /s/ Bradley D. SlyeBradley D. SlyeChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


37

---
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 Quarterly Report of Tremisis Energy Acquisition Corporation
II (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 (the
“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I Yeon-su Kim, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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, as amended; and




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




Date:
      August 12, 2009
            /s/ Yeon-su KimName:
            Yeon-su
      KimTitle:
            Chief
      Financial Officer and Secretary(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, John
Terwilliger, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Houston American Energy Corp. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008
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 Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
Houston American Energy Corp.



By:

/S/    JOHN F.
TERWILLIGERName:

John F. TerwilligerTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerDated:

March 16, 2009
# C_2017309EN.01003801.xml

| 18.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/38

---

Action brought on 28 July 2017 — The Scotch Whisky Association v EUIPO — José Estévez (JOHN COR)

(Case T-469/17)

(2017/C 309/50)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: The Scotch Whisky Association (Edinburgh, United Kingdom) (represented by: F. Rodríguez Domínguez and J. Gracia Albero, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: José Estévez, SA (Jerez de la Frontera, Spain)

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: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: European Union word mark ‘JOHN COR’ — European Union trade mark No 10 965 937

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 May 2017 in Case R 1290/2016-2

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Articles 64(1) and 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 64(1) and 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009.

| — | Infringement of Article 52(1)(a), in conjunction with Article 7(1)(g) and (j), of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 52(1)(a), in conjunction with Article 7(1)(g) and (j), of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Ronald Jackson, Appellant, v Mark L. Bradt, as Superintendent of Elmira Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

Submitted December 5, 2011;

decided January 17, 2012

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that this motion for leave to appeal does not lie from the order of the individual Justice of the Appellate Division (see NY Const, art VI, § 3 [b]; CPLR 5602).