alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2018063EN.01002101.xml

| 19.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/21

---

Action brought on 22 December 2017 — achtung! v EUIPO (achtung!)

(Case T-832/17)

(2018/C 063/28)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: achtung! GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: G.J. Seelig and D. Bischof, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the figurative mark containing the word element ‘achtung!’ — International registration No 1 297 443

Trade mark at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 October 2017 in Case R 490/2017-4

Contested decision:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the defendant of 23 October 2017 (Case R 490/2017-4); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the defendant of 23 October 2017 (Case R 490/2017-4);

| — | amend the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the defendant of 23 October 2017 (Case R 490/2017-4) in such a way that international registration No 1 297 443 ‘achtung!’ (word/figure) is protected for the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

amend the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the defendant of 23 October 2017 (Case R 490/2017-4) in such a way that international registration No 1 297 443 ‘achtung!’ (word/figure) is protected for the European Union;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings and the costs necessarily incurred by the applicant for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings and the costs necessarily incurred by the applicant for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

In support of the action, the applicant alleges an infringement pursuant to Article 72(2) of Regulation 2017/1001. The defendant, it submits, erred in law in assessing the distinctive character of the trade mark under Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001 and infringed the principles of equal treatment and sound administration.

---
05 JANUARY 2018

REVISED 2018 TRADING AND HOLIDAY SCHEDULE

The trading and holiday schedule for 2018 is being revised to include the November 12, 2018 Veterans 

Day holiday for Credit Contracts.

TRADING HOURS FOR CREDIT CONTRACTS

The trading hours for all Credit Contracts traded on ICE Swap Trade will be Monday through Friday 

7:00 AM GMT (London time) to 5:30 PM ET (New York time).

Trading hours on the last trading day of any Credit Contract (i.e. the day prior to a Credit Contract roll) 

will be 4:30 PM GMT (London time) with respect to iTraxx Credit Contracts and 4:30 PM ET (New York 

time) with respect to CDX Credit Contracts.

Both the U.K. and U.S. markets will be closed on the following holidays:

Holiday Date

Good Friday March 30, 2018

Memorial Day

U.K. Spring Bank Holiday May 28, 2018

Christmas Day December 25, 2018

New Year’s Day January 1, 2019

With respect to the following holidays, the trading hours will be 7:00 AM GMT (London time) to 2:00 PM 

ET (New York time):

Early Close/Holiday Date

U.S. Early Close March 29, 2018

U.S. Early Close May 25, 2018

U.S. Early Close July 3, 2018

U.S. Early Close November 23, 2018

U.S. Early Close December 24, 2018

U.S. Early Close December 31, 2018

The market will be closed in the U.S. and will be open in the U.K. from 7:00 AM GMT (London time) to 

6:00 PM GMT (London time) on the following holidays:
© 2017 Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. The following are trademarks of Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. and/or its affiliated companies: Intercontinental 

Exchange, ICE, New York Stock Exchange and NYSE. For more information regarding trademarks owned by Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. and/or its 

affiliated companies see: intercontinentalexchange.com/terms-of-use

Holiday Date

Martin Luther King Day January 15, 2018

Presidents Day February 19, 2018

Independence Day July 4, 2018

Labor Day September 3, 2018

Columbus Day October 8, 2018

Veterans Day November 12, 2018

Thanksgiving Day November 22, 2018

The market will be closed in the U.K. and will be open in the U.S. from 7:00 AM ET (New York time) to 

5:30 PM ET (New York time) on the following holidays:

Holiday Date

Easter Monday April 2, 2018

U.K. May Day May 7, 2018

U.K. Summer Bank

Holiday August 27, 2018

U.K. Boxing Day December 26, 2018

TRADING HOURS FOR COMMODITY CONTRACTS

Trading in Commodity Contracts will be available at all times (including holidays) except during system 

maintenance. Maintenance windows are reserved each weekday from 6:05 PM ET through 7:00 PM 

ET and Friday 6:05 PM ET through Sunday 5:00 PM ET.

FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

ICE Swap Trade Compliance

ICESwapCompliance@theice.com.

View All Notices / Contact Us / Media Inquiries
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Arlene M.Morris, certify that:

1.      I havereviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Affymax, Inc. ;

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

3.      Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.      Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

a.      Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, [including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,]particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b.      Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c.      Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.      Theregistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a.      Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b.      Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

|        |   | By:      | /s/ Arlene M. Morris                                                                                      |
|--------|--------|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | * * | President, Chief Executive Officer  and Member of the Board of  Directors (*Principal Executive Officer*) |

 

**Date: March  30, 2007**

----
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
of RxBids (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Mack Bradley, Chief
Executive Officer and Acting Principal Accounting 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; and





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





/s/   Mack
Bradley





Mack
Bradley


Chief
Executive Officer


Acting
Principal Accounting Officer


November
16, 2009





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  The
foregoing certifications are accompanying the Company's Form 10-Q solely
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) and is not
being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure
document.
# C_2020271EN.01000502.xml

| 17.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/5

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 11 June 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Słupsku — Poland) — Criminal proceedings against JI

(Case C-634/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA - Minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties involving illicit drug trafficking - Article 2(1)(c) - Article 4(2)(a) - Concept of ‘large quantities of drugs’ - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Equal treatment - Articles 20 and 21 - Principle of legality of criminal offences and penalties - Article 49)

(2020/C 271/06)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy w Słupsku

Party in the main criminal proceedings

JI

Intervener: Prokuratura Rejonowa w Słupsku

Operative part of the judgment

Article 4(2)(a) of Council Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA of 25 October 2004 laying down minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking, read in conjunction with Article 2(1)(c) thereof, and Articles 20, 21 and 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding a Member State from classifying as a criminal offence the possession of a significant quantity of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances both for personal consumption and for the purposes of illicit drug trafficking, while leaving the interpretation of the concept of ‘significant quantity of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances’ to the discretion of the national courts, on a case-by-case basis, provided that that interpretation is reasonably foreseeable.

---

(1)  OJ C 65, 18.2.2019.

---
# Appendix A

# Appendix B Effective 02.28.20
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JAMES LEROY THOMAS,

Petitioner

v.

THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 

FRANKLIN COUNTY, COMMONWEALTH 

OF PENN.,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 74 MM 2023

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of September, 2023, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the “Motion to Petition the Court for Redress of 

Grievance” is DENIED.
#### Sidney HUBBARD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Tom L. CAREY, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 07-16570.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 5, 2010.*

Filed April 21, 2010.

Karyn H. Bueur, Esquire, Karyn H. Bu-cur Attorney at Law, Laguna Hills, CA, David Miles Porter, Assistant Federal Public Defender, FPDCA-Federal Public Defender’s Office, Sacramento, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Arnold O. Overoye, Esquire, AGCA-Of-fice of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Respondent-Appel-lee.

*621Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App.

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Sidney Hubbard appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Hubbard contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial because his counsel failed to investigate potentially exculpatory evidence concerning the alleged reputation of the robbery victim. However, Hubbard failed to demonstrate that such evidence could have been discovered by counsel with reasonable diligence. Thus, the California court’s rejection of this claim were neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court law. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); *see also Strickland v. Washington,*466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Hubbard also contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel did not object to the admission, at trial, of a videotaped store surveillance footage that lacked audio. Hubbard maintains that the missing audio component would have provided exculpatory evidence. However, Hubbard has failed to show that the missing audio portion was exculpatory. Thus the California court’s rejection of this claim was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court law. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1); *see also Strickland,*466 U.S. at 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052.

We construe appellant’s additional arguments as a motion to expand the certificate of appealability. So construed, the motion is denied. *See*9th Cir. R. 22-1(e); *see also Hiivola v. Wood,*195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
# C_2020036EN.01000402.xml

| 3.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 4 December 2019 — Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A. v European Commission, Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-342/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Internal market in natural gas - Directive 2009/73/EC - Article 32 - Third-party access - Article 41(6), (8) and (10) - Rules on tariffs - Article 36 - Application for an exemption - Rules governing the operation of the OPAL pipeline - National regulatory authority - Exemption decision - Request for modification - European Commission Decision - Action for annulment - Fourth paragraph of Article 263 TFEU - Admissibility - Decision of no direct concern to the appellant)

(2020/C 36/05)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Appellant: Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A. (represented initially by M. Jeżewski, adwokat, and subsequently E. Buczkowska, radca prawny and W. Sadowski, adwokat)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: K. Herrmann and O. Beynet, acting as Agents), Federal Republic of Germany (represented initially by T. Henze, and subsequently by J. Möller, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A. to pay its own costs and bear those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Polskie Górnictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo S.A. to pay its own costs and bear those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 276, 6.8.2018.

---
#### PENLAND v. PRIMEAU

No. 239P98-2

Case below: 129 N.C.App. 647

Notice of appeal by defendant pursuant to G.S. 7A-30 (substantial constitutional question) dismissed 3 December 1998. Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 December 1998.
#### STATE v. PATTON

No. 347P98

Case below: 130 N.C.App. 487

Notice of appeal by defendant pursuant to G.S. 7A-30 (substantial constitutional question) dismissed 5 November 1998. Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 5 November 1998.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 USC. 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 Golden
Pond Healthcare, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael C. Litt, Chief Financial Officer and
Secretary of the Company, hereby 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|             |  |  |  |                                                       
|------------ |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------------------
|             |  | 
|May 13, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Michael C. Litt                                   
|             |  |  |  | Michael C. Litt, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Breanna Spencer, * From the 35th District

 Court of Brown County,

 Trial Court No. CR21994.

Vs. No. 11-13-00007-CR * March 5, 2015

The State of Texas, * Opinion by Bailey, J.

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that 

there is no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this 

court’s opinion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.1


            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
                         RULE 13a-14(b) OR 15d-14(b) AND
                             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 Jurak Corporation World
Wide, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for quarter ended November 30, 2005,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the date hereof, I,
Anthony C. Jurak, Chairman of the Board and Director and Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, certify 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, that:

        (1)  the Company's Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
             in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
             operations of the Company.


Date: January 19, 2006       /s/ Anthony C. Jurak
                             ---------------------------------------------------
                             Anthony C. Jurak
                             Chairman of the Board and Director
                             Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 1 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 2 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 3 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 4 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 5 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 6 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 7 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 8 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 9 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 10 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 11 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 12 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 13 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 14 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 15 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 16 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 17 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 18 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 19 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 20 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 21 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 22 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 23 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 24 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 25 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 26 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 27 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 28 of 29
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 6 Filed 01/03/2008 Page 29 of 29
#### In the Matter of New York State Urban Development Corporation, Doing Business as Empire State Development Corporation, Respondent, to Acquire in Fee Simple Certain Real Property Currently Owned by Fallsite, LLC and Known as 232 Sixth Street, City of Niagara Falls, and Others, Together with All Compensable Interests Therein Currently Owned by Fallsite, LLC, et al., and Any Other Condemnees Who Are Currently Unknown. Fallsite, LLC, et al., Appellants.

Submitted November 21, 2011;

decided January 10, 2012

Reported below, 85 AD3d 1723.

*871Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.