alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2019280EN.01000801.xml

| 19.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 280/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 280/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 June 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Višje sodišče v Mariboru — Slovenia) — Aleš Kuhar, Jožef Kuhar v Addiko Bank d.d.

(Case C-407/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Directive 93/13/EEC - Proceedings for the enforcement of a mortgage claim - Directly enforceable notarial instrument - Judicial review of unfair terms - Suspension of enforcement - Lack of jurisdiction of the court hearing the request for enforcement - Consumer protection - Principle of effectiveness - Proper interpretation)

(2019/C 280/09)

Language of the case: Slovenian

Referring court

Višje sodišče v Mariboru

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Aleš Kuhar, Jožef Kuhar

Defendants: Addiko Bank d.d.

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted, in the light of the principle of effectiveness, as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which the national court hearing an application for the enforcement of a mortgage loan agreement, concluded between a trader and a consumer in the form of a directly enforceable notarial deed, does not have the possibility, either at the request of the consumer or ex officio, of examining whether the terms contained in such a deed are unfair within the meaning of that Directive and, on that basis, of suspending the requested enforcement.

---

(1)  OJ C 294, 20.8.2018.

---
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 102 (Friday, May 25, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 28889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-13272]



[[Page 28889]]

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

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED


Procurement List Proposed Addition

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled.

ACTION: Proposed addition to procurement list.

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

SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing to add to the Procurement List a 
service to be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are 
blind or have other severe disabilities.

COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED ON OR BEFORE: June 25, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Arlington, Virginia 22202-3259.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Louis R. Bartalot (703) 603-7740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published pursuant to 41 
U.S.C. 47(a) (2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide 
interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the possible 
impact of the proposed actions.
    If the Committee approves the proposed addition, all entities of 
the Federal Government (except as otherwise indicated) will be required 
to procure the service listed below from nonprofit agencies employing 
persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.
    I certify that the following action will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors 
considered for this certification were:
    1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, 
recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other 
than the small organizations that will furnish the service to the 
Government.
    2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish 
the service to the Government.
    3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would 
accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-
48c) in connection with the service proposed for addition to the 
Procurement List. Comments on this certification are invited. 
Commenters should identify the statement(s) underlying the 
certification on which they are providing additional information.
    The following service has been proposed for addition to Procurement 
List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

Service

Food Service Attendant, Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii
NPA: Lanakila Rehabilitation Center, Honolulu, Hawaii

Louis R. Bartalot,
Director, Program Evaluation and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 01-13272 Filed 5-24-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
#### L&L Associates Holding Corp., Respondent, v Joseph A.F. Sadowski, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

Submitted January 30, 2012;

decided March 27, 2012

Reported below, 2011 NY Slip Op 84844(11).

Motion for reargument etc. denied *[see*18 NY3d 854 (2011)]. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
Revised 6/30/05

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

	On [DATE] and [DATE], we notified appellant, in accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $125 filing fee was paid.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).  Appellant has not paid the $125 filing fee.  See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

	Because appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court’s order of July 21, 1998,2 we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

	Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:

DELIVERED:

	COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO.

	APPELLANT

	V.

	APPELLEE

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

	FROM THE COURT OF  COUNTYNO. 2-07-333   -        -CV

TeErRrRyY SiImMmMoOnNsS	APPELLANT	

	V.

ElLmMoOwW HoOlLdDiInNgGsS, InNcC. fF/kK/aA Rio Pumping Services, Inc.	APPELLEE

RiIoO PuUmMpPiInNgG SeErRvViIcCeEsS, InNcC.

	----------

	FROM THE 348 TH348TH          DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT            COUNTY

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

	On oCTOBEROctober 25, 2007 ___________ and November 7, 2007 __________, we notified appellant, in accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $125 75[or $175 filing fee was paid.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).  Appellant has not paid the $1275 filing fee.  See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

	Because appellant has failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court'’s order of Auaugusgust 28, 2007July 21, 1998,2 we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

	Appellant shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d)43.4..

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:  CAYCE, C.J.; LIVNIINGSTON and DAUPHIONOTNOT, JJ. 

DELIVERED:  dEBCEMBER December 6, 2007
Exhibit 31.2




CERTIFICATION




I,
Richard A. Baker , certify that:




1.  I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NRDC Acquisition
Corp.;




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 quarterly report;




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




4.  The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) [Omission in accordance with SEC Release
No. 33-8760] for the registrant 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 registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;




(b)
[Omission in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8760];




(c)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’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




(d)
disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
and




5.  The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’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 registrant’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 registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting.






Date:
      May 13, 2008
            By:
            /s/RICHARD A.
      BAKERRichard
      A. BakerChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Financial Officer)
## ***EXHIBIT 21.1***

 

# ***SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT***

 
| **NAME**                               | ** ** | **JURISDICTION  OF  INCORPORATION/  ORGANIZATION** | ** ** | **% OF  OWNERSHIP** |   |
|----------------------------------------|------------|----------------------------------------------------|------------|---------------------|--------|
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| dj Orthopedics, LLC                    |       | Delaware                                           |       | 100                 | %      |
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| DJ Orthopedics Capital Corporation     |       | Delaware                                           |       | 100                 | %      |
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| dj Orthopedics de Mexico S.A. de C.V.  |       | Mexico                                             |       | 100                 | %      |
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| dj Ortho, Canada Inc.                  |       | Canada                                             |       | 100                 | %      |
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| dj Orthopedics UK Limited              |       | United Kingdom                                     |       | 100                 | %      |
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| dj Orthopedics Deutschland GmbH        |       | Germany                                            |       | 100                 | %      |
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| dj Orthopedics France S.A.S.           |       | France                                             |       | 100                 | %      |
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| dj Orthopedics Development Corporation |       | Delaware                                           |       | 100                 | %      |
|                                   |       |                                               |       |                |   |
| dj Orthopedics Nordic ApS              |       | Denmark                                            |       | 100                 | %      |

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Shaun McManus, Appellant, v Martin F. Horn, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Corrections, Respondent.

Submitted January 3, 2012;

decided January 5, 2012

Reported below, 77 AD3d 571.

*868Motion by New York Civil Liberties Union et al. for leave to appear amici curiae on the appeal herein granted only to the extent that the proposed brief is accepted as filed. Two copies of the brief must be served and 19 copies filed within seven days.
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of The Valspar Corporation

The following are the significant subsidiaries of The Valspar Corporation. Where the name of the subsidiary
includes the Valspar name, that subsidiary does business under the Valspar corporate name:

State of IncorporationEngineered Polymer Solutions, Inc.

DelawarePlasti-Kote Co., Inc.

OhioValspar Coatings Finance Corporation

MinnesotaValspar Finance Corporation

MinnesotaValspar Inc.

CanadaValspar Refinish, Inc.

MississippiValspar Sourcing, Inc.

MinnesotaThe Valspar Corporation Limitada

BrazilThe Valspar (Australia) Corporation Pty Limited

AustraliaThe Valspar (Nantes) Corporation, S.A.S.

FranceThe Valspar (France) Corporation, S.A.S.

FranceValspar Industries GmbH

GermanyThe Valspar (Germany) GmbH

GermanyThe Valspar (H.K.) Corporation Limited

Hong KongValspar Hai Hong Coatings (Shenzhen) Company Limited

PRCValspar Mexicana, S.A. de C.V.

MexicoValspar Rock Company Ltd.

JapanThe Valspar (Singapore) Corporation Pte Limited

SingaporeThe Valspar (South Africa) Corporation (Pty) Limited

South AfricaThe Valspar (UK) Corporation, Limited

United KingdomThe Valspar (Switzerland) Corporation AG

SwitzerlandThe Valspar (Malaysia) Corporation Sdn Bhd

MalaysiaDongguan Lilly Paint Industries Limited

PRCLilly Industries (Shanghai) Limited

PRCHua Run Paints Holdings Company Limited

Hong KongValspar Powder Coatings Limited

United Kingdom


Subsidiaries not listed would not, if considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, constitute
a significant subsidiary.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-1697

JAMES ARTHUR YOUNG, a/k/a Jim Young, Advertising for all living and deceased persons

from tobacco related illness within USA, et

al,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

MARYLAND, and other 49 States and Territories

of United States, et al,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Marvin J. Garbis, District Judge. (CA-98-

1260-MJG)

Submitted: August 27, 1998 Decided: September 11, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Arthur Young, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court’s order dismissing his

civil action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have

reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. Young v. Maryland, No. CA-98-1260-MJG (D. Md. May

6, 1998). 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.

AFFIRMED
#### STATE ex rel. COMM’R OF INS. v. N.C. RATE BUREAU

No. 307A98

Case below: 129 N.C.App. 662

Petition by petitioner (NC Rate Bureau) for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals allowed 5 November 1998.
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 United Financial Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, Kevin P. Clark, Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my 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.

/s/   Kevin P. Clark

---

---
**Exhibit 99.7**

** **

 

 

**Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP**

 

 

We hereby consent to (i) the inclusion in Encana Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2011; and (ii) the incorporation by reference in Encana Corporation’s registration statement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-150453); and (iii) the incorporation by reference in Encana Corporation’s registration statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-124218, 333-85598 and 333-140856); and (iv) the incorporation by reference in Encana Corporation’s registration statement on Form F-9 (File No. 333-165626) of our Auditor’s Report dated February 23, 2012 relating to the Encana Corporation Consolidated Financial Statements as at December 31, 2011, December 31, 2010 and January 1, 2010 and for each of the years in the two year period ended December 31, 2011 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Encana Corporation as of December 31, 2011.

 

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

 

Chartered Accountants

Calgary, Alberta

February 23, 2012

 

 
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | *PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Chartered Accountants*                                                                                                                                                                                 |
|   | *111 5 Avenue SW, Suite 3100, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 5L3*                                                                                                                                                                     |
|   | *T: +1 403 509 7500, F: +1   403 781 1825, www.pwc.com/ca*                                                                                                                                                                          |
|   | * *                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | “PwC”   refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an Ontario limited liability   partnership, which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International   Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity. |

 

----
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Before the 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 

In the matter of Eurex Zurich AG 

revocation of registration pursuant to 

§ 48.9(b)(4) of the regulations of the 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

ORDER OF REVOCATION OF REGISTRATION 

By Order of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission) dated May 30, 

2017, Eurex Zurich AG (EZAG or Exchange), a foreign board of trade (FBOT) authorized by 

and subject to regulation in Switzerland by the Financial Market Supervisory Authority 

(FINMA), was granted registration pursuant to Section 4(b)(l) of the Commodity Exchange Act 

(the Act), 7 U.S.C. § 6(b)(l), and Part 48 of the Commission's regulations, 17 C.F.R. Part 48, to 

permit trading by direct access, as that term is defined in Section 4(b)(l)(A) of the Act (FBOT 

registration). 

At the request of EZAG and following the voluntary closure of the Exchange, FINMA 

issued an Order dated June 28, 2018, releasing EZAG from supervision by FINMA effective 

June 30, 2018. 

Commission regulation 48.8(a)(2)(i) specifies that, as a condition for maintaining FBOT 

registration, "[t]he foreign board of trade will continue to satisfy the criteria for a regulated 

market or licensed exchange pursuant to the regulatory regime described in its application and 

will continue to be subject to oversight by the regulatory authorities described in its application." 

1 
Commission regulation 48.9(b)(4) provides that "[t]he Commission may revoke a foreign 

board of trade's registration in the event the foreign board of trade ... is no longer authorized, 

licensed or registered, as applicable, as a regulated market and/or exchange ... or ceases to 

operate as a foreign board of trade ... " 

In light of the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to 17 C.F.R. § 48.9(b)(4), that the 

registration ofEZAG pursuant to Section 4(b)(l) of the Commodity Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. 

§ 6(b)(l), is hereby revoked, effective June 30, 2018. 

Issued in Washington, D.C. this 3rd day of August, 2018. 

By the Commission 

d)JJ) kq~JJ Christopher J ~ irkpatrick 

Secretary of the Commission 

2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 24 - 0022 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JEFFREY DAVID PIERCE,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including October 11 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 9 2024

09/09/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0022
#### STATE v. MOORE

No. 366A98

Case below: 130 N.C.App. 342

Motion by Attorney General to dismiss appeal allowed 8 October 1998.
Doc 

United States District Court

Southern District of New York

Office of the Clerk

U.S. Courthouse

500 Pearl Street, New York, N.Y. 10007-1213

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -X

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT

07cv5807

Borgra v. The Rep. Of Argentina

 

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X 

 

Pursuant to the memorandum of the Case Processing Assistant, the above-entitled action is 

reassigned to the calendar of

Judge Griesa

All future documents submitted in this action are to be presented in the Clerk=s

Office of the Southern District Court for filing and shall bear the assigned judge=s

initials after the case number.

The attorney(s) for the plaintiff(s) are requested to serve a copy of the Notice of

assignment on all defendants.

J. Michael McMahon, CLERK

Dated: 08/17/2007

By: Jenny R. Horne

 Deputy Clerk 

 

 

cc: Attorneys of Record 

PS REASSIGNMENT FORM 

 

Data Quality Control 

Revised: March 9, 2001

Case 1:07-cv-05807-TPG Document 5 Filed 08/17/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE v. ALLEN

No. 70A86-5

Case below: 349 N.C. 364

331 N.C. 746

323 N.C. 208

Halifax County Superior Court

Petition by defendant to rehear petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 31 dismissed 30 December 1998.