alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009082EN.01003201.xml

| 4.4.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/32

---

Action brought on 27 January 2009 — Hipp & Co v OHIM — Nestlé (Bebio)

(Case T-41/09)

(2009/C 82/56)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: Hipp & Co (Sachseln, Switzerland) (represented by: A. Bognár and M. Kinkeldey, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sociéte des Produits Nestlé, S.A. (Vevey, Switzerland)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 25 November 2008 in case R 1790/2007-2; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 25 November 2008 in case R 1790/2007-2; and

| — | Order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for the Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for the Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘Bebio’, for goods in classes 5, 29, 30 and 32

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited: International trade mark registration No 187 436 of the word mark ‘BEBA’ for goods in classes 5, 29 and 30; Community trade mark registration No 3 043 387 of the word mark ‘BEBA’ for goods in classes 5, 29 and 30

Mark or sign cited:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Partially upheld the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation 40/94 as the Board of Appeal wrongly assessed that there was a likelihood of confusion between the trade marks concerned

Pleas in law:

---
# C_2010037EN.01005001.xml

| 13.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/50

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 15 December 2009 — Apostolov v Commission

(Case F-8/09) (1)

1

(Civil service - Officials - Action inadmissible - Delay)

2010/C 37/78

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Apostolov (Saarwellingen, Germany) (represented by: D. Schneider-Addaeh-Mensah, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the decision of EPSO not to include the applicant’s name in the reserve list for selection procedure EPSO/CAST27/4/07

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | Dismisses the action as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action as inadmissible.

| 2. | Orders Mr Apostolov to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Apostolov to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 244, 10.10.2009, p. 16.

1

---
Lakshmi ARUNACHALAM, petitioner, v. SAP AMERICA, INC.

No. 16-1442.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
Vernon MADISON, petitioner, v. ALABAMA.

No. 17-7535.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Alabama denied.
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.                  

###### Department of Energy

# AGENCY:

Office of Nuclear and National Security Information, DOE.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the Secretary of Energy's decision to classify as Restricted Data certain privately generated information concerning an innovative isotope separation process for enriching uranium. Under 10 CFR 1045.21(c), the Secretary of Energy is required to inform the public whenever the authority to classify privately generated information as Restricted Data is exercised.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

An Australian company, Silex Systems, Limited, has been developing the Separation of Isotopes by Laser Excitation (SILEX) process to enrich uranium since 1992. In 1996, USEC, Inc., purchased the rights from Silex Systems, Limited, to evaluate and further develop this process. The privately generated information which the Secretary of Energy has classified as Restricted Data under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, pertains to certain elements of the SILEX process.

Issued in Washington, DC on June 19, 2001.

Joseph S. Mahaley,

Acting Director, Office of Security and Emergency Operations.

[FR Doc. 01-15982 Filed 6-25-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



I, John M. Greeley, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
the Quarterly Report of Tarantella, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2004 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 Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Tarantella, Inc.



By:

/s/ John M. GreeleyName:

John M. GreeleyTitle:

Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)May 14, 2004
Jonathan Robert TARVER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-1004.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
----

----

I Säädökset, jotka on julkaistava

----

KOMISSION ASETUS (EY) N:o 1571/2004,

annettu 6 päivänä syyskuuta 2004,

tuonnin kiinteistä arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan määrittämiseksi

EUROOPAN YHTEISÖJEN KOMISSIO, joka

ottaa huomioon Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen,

ottaa huomioon hedelmien ja vihannesten tuontijärjestelmän soveltamista koskevista yksityiskohtaisista säännöistä 21 päivänä joulukuuta 1994 annetun komission asetuksen (EY) N:o 3223/94 (1) ja erityisesti sen 4 artiklan 1 kohdan,

sekä katsoo seuraavaa:

ON ANTANUT TÄMÄN ASETUKSEN:

1 artikla

Asetuksen (EY) N:o 3223/94 4 artiklassa tarkoitetut tuonnin kiinteät arvot vahvistetaan liitteessä olevassa taulukossa merkityllä tavalla.

2 artikla

Tämä asetus tulee voimaan 7 päivänä syyskuuta 2004.

Tämä asetus on kaikilta osiltaan velvoittava, ja sitä sovelletaan sellaisenaan kaikissa jäsenvaltioissa.

Tehty Brysselissä 6 päivänä syyskuuta 2004.

Komission puolesta

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Maatalouden pääjohtaja

----

(1)EYVL L 337, 24.12.1994, s. 66. Asetus sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna asetuksella (EY) N:o 1947/2002 (EYVL L 299, 1.11.2002, s. 17).

----

LIITE

tuonnin kiinteistä arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan määrittämiseksi 6 päivänä syyskuuta 2004 annettuun komission asetukseen

----

(1)  Komission asetuksessa (EY) N:o 2081/2003 (EUVL L 313, 28.11.2003, s. 11) vahvistettu maanimikkeistö. Koodi ”999” tarkoittaa ”muuta alkuperää”.

----

Oikaisuja

----

Oikaistaan komission asetus (EY) N:o 408/2003, annettu 5 päivänä maaliskuuta 2003, kaupan pitämisessä hedelmä- ja vihannesalalla sovellettavista vaatimustenmukaisuustarkastuksista annetun asetuksen (EY) N:o 1148/2001 muuttamisesta

(Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti L 62, 6. maaliskuuta 2003)

Sivulla 12, liitteessä olevan asetuksen (EY) N:o 1148/2001 liitteen IV korvaavan tekstin 2 kohdan d alakohdan kolmannessa luetelmakohdassa olevan taulukon ”Pakatut tuotteet” sarakkeessa ”Näytteeseen otettavien pakkausten lukumäärä (perusnäytteet)”:

korvataan:

”4”

seuraavasti:

”7”.

----

----

Oikaistaan neuvoston asetus (EY, Euratom) N:o 1605/2002, tehty 25 päivänä kesäkuuta 2002, Euroopan yhteisöjen yleiseen talousarvioon sovellettavasta varainhoitoasetuksesta

(Euroopan yhteisöjen virallinen lehti L 248, 16. syyskuuta 2002)

Sivulla 29, 113 artiklan 2 kohdassa:

korvataan:

”2.   Ellei perussäädöksessä toisin säädetä, yleistä eurooppalaista etua edistäville elimille myönnetyt toiminta-avustukset ovat kuitenkin niitä uusittaessa luonteeltaan taannehtivia.”

seuraavasti:

”2.   Ellei perussäädöksessä toisin säädetä, yleistä eurooppalaista etua edistäville elimille myönnetyt toiminta-avustukset ovat niitä uusittaessa asteittain alenevia.”

----
# C_2009220EN.01004201.xml

| 12.9.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 220/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.9.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 220/42

---

Action brought on 27 July 2009 — Carrols v OHIM — Gambettola (Pollo Tropical CHICKEN ON THE GRILL)

(Case T-291/09)

2009/C 220/87

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Carrols Corp. (New York, United States) (represented by: I. Temiño Ceniceros, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Giulio Gambettola (Los Realejos, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | declare the present action and its annexes admissible; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the present action and its annexes admissible;

| — | annul the decision of the Board of Appeal in so far as it relates to the grounds for invalidity under Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Board of Appeal in so far as it relates to the grounds for invalidity under Article 52(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009;

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

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: Figurative mark containing the word element ‘Pollo Tropical CHICKEN ON THE GRILL’ (Application No. 002938801) for goods and services in Classes 25, 41 and 43.

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought:

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: Giulio Gambettola.

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity: The applicant.

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity:

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration: National figurative mark (No 2 201 552) containing the word element ‘Pollo Tropical CHICKEN ON THE GRILL’ and the national word mark ‘POLLO TROPICAL’ (No 2 201 543) for services in Class 43 (‘restaurant services’).

Trade mark right of applicant for the declaration:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Application for a declaration of invalidity dismissed.

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Misinterpretation of Articles 52(1)(b) and 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark.

Pleas in law:

---
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1633 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1633

   Supporting the goals and ideals of ``Lights On Afterschool!'', a 
             national celebration of after-school programs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 16, 2010

Mrs. Lowey (for herself, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Grayson, Ms. Corrine Brown of 
 Florida, Mr. Moore of Kansas, Mr. Ortiz, Mr. Loebsack, Mr. McGovern, 
   Mr. Honda, Mr. Courtney, Ms. Castor of Florida, and Ms. McCollum) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                         on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Supporting the goals and ideals of ``Lights On Afterschool!'', a 
             national celebration of after-school programs.

Whereas high-quality after-school programs provide safe, challenging, engaging, 
        and fun learning experiences to help children and youth develop their 
        social, emotional, physical, cultural and academic skills;
Whereas high-quality after-school programs support working families by ensuring 
        that their children are safe and productive after the regular school day 
        ends;
Whereas high-quality after-school programs build strong communities by involving 
        the Nation's students, parents, business leaders, and adult volunteers 
        in the lives of the Nation's young people, thereby promoting positive 
        relationships among children, youth, families, and adults;
Whereas high-quality after-school programs engage families, schools, and diverse 
        community partners in advancing the well-being of the Nation's children;
Whereas ``Lights On Afterschool!'', a national celebration of after-school 
        programs on October 21, 2010, promotes the critical importance of high-
        quality after-school programs in the lives of children, their families, 
        and their communities;
Whereas more than 28,000,000 children have parents who work outside the home, 
        and 15,100,000 children have no place to go after school; and
Whereas many after-school programs are struggling to keep their doors open and 
        their lights on: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports the goals and 
ideals of ``Lights On Afterschool!'', a national celebration of after-
school programs.
                                 <all>
```
Joshua R. NISBET, petitioner, v. MAINE.

No. 15-9565.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine denied.
Ron C. EVERETT, petitioner, v. T.J. CONLEY, Warden.

No. 15-9711.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Brian Edward DAVIS, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 16-5696.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.
# C_2012089EN.01002101.xml

| 24.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of (Fourth Chamber) of 14 February 2012 — Electrolux and Whirlpool v Commission

(Joined Cases T-115/09 and T-116/09) (1)

1

(State aid - Restructuring aid for a manufacturer of large home appliances notified by the French Republic - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the common market subject to conditions - Manifest errors of assessment - Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty)

2012/C 89/33

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Electrolux AB (Stockholm, Sweden) (represented by: F. Wijckmans and H. Burez, lawyers) (Case T-115/09); and Whirlpool Europe BV (Breda, Netherlands) (represented: initially by F. Tuytschaever and B. Bellen, and subsequently by H. Burez and F. Wijckmans, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn and C. Giolito, Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented: initially by G. de Bergues and A.-L. Vendrolini, and subsequently by G. de Bergues and J. Gstalter, Agents); Fagor France SA (Rueil-Malmaison, France) (represented by J. Derenne and A. Müller-Rappard, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the Commission Decision of 21 October 2008 on State aid C 44/2007 (ex N 460/2007) which France is planning to implement for FagorBrandt (OJ 2009 L 160, p. 11.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Commission Decision 2009/485/EC of 21 October 2008 on State aid No C 44/07 (ex N 460/07) which France is planning to implement for FagorBrandt; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Commission Decision 2009/485/EC of 21 October 2008 on State aid No C 44/07 (ex N 460/07) which France is planning to implement for FagorBrandt;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Electrolux AB and Whirlpool Europe BV; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those of Electrolux AB and Whirlpool Europe BV;

| 3. | Orders the French Republic and Fagor France SA to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the French Republic and Fagor France SA to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 113, 16.5.2009.

1

---
Allie Charles BESSETTE, petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 16-9295.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Exhibit 12.2

Certification

Pursuant
to Section 302

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Gabrielle Heaton, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F/A for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017 (Report) of Kazia Therapeutics Limited (formerly known as Novogen Limited) (the Company);
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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;
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                       
|-------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Gabrielle Heaton                                   
|Gabrielle Heaton Director of Finance and
Administration

Date: December 18, 2017
David TEJADA, petitioner, v. NEW YORK.

No. 16-5118.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 5, 2016.

Petition for rehearing denied.
UNITED STA TES OF AMERICA 

Before the 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 

In the Matter of the Application of 

Guaranty Clearing Corporation 

For Registration as a Derivatives Clearing Organization 

ORDER OF REGISTRATION 

The Guaranty Clearing Corporation ("GCC") has submitted, pursuant to Section Sb of the 

Commodity Exchange Act ("Act"), an application for registration as a derivatives clearing 

organization ("DCO") for the clearing of contracts for futures and options on futures. The 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission ("Commission") has reviewed the appJication and the 

complete record in this matter. For the reasons set forth in the Memorandum to the Commission 

by the Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight recommending that the Commission 

register GCC as a DCO, the Commission finds that GCC has demonstrated that it has or wi]] 

comply with the requirements under the Act and the Commission's regulations thereunder 

applicable to it. Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED, under Section Sb of the Act, U.S.C. §7a-1, that the application ofGCC 

for registration as a DCO is granted for the purpose of clearing by GCC of commodity futures 

and commodity options contracts. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that: 

1. GCC shalJ remain in compJiance with the core principles set forth in Section Sb of the Act 

and Part 39 of the Commission's regulations and fulfi]) each of the various representations 
made in its application to the Commission for DCO registration demonstrating compliance 

with each of the core principles. 

2. GCC shall inform the Commission immediately of information regarding any event, 

circumstance, or situation concerning any ofGCC's operations as a DCO that detracts from 

GCC's ability to continue complying with any of the core principles set forth in Section 5b of 

the Act and Part 39 of the Commission's regulations. 

3. GCC shall immediately inform the Commission directly of any clearing member default or 

any material event which might jeopardize a clearing member's continuing ability to meet its 

obligations. 

4. GCC shall ensure the performance of all self-regulatory functions required of it as a DCO 

under the Act and Commission regulations, including enforcement of all GCC rules. 

Issued in Washington, D.C., this __lQ._ day of July 2002. 

By the Commission 

ecretary of the Commission 

2