alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009055EN.01002002.xml

| 7.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/20

---

Action brought on 9 January 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-11/09)

(2009/C 55/34)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by C. Cattabriga and M. Teles Romão, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2006/17/EC (1) of 8 February 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards certain technical requirements for the donation, procurement and testing of human tissues and cells or, at any event, by failing to communicate those measures to the Commission, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive |
| --- | --- |

—

a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Commission Directive 2006/17/EC (1) of 8 February 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards certain technical requirements for the donation, procurement and testing of human tissues and cells or, at any event, by failing to communicate those measures to the Commission, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive

1

| — | an order that the Portuguese Republic should pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

an order that the Portuguese Republic should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period prescribed for transposing the directive expired on 1 November 2006.

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 38, p. 40.

1

---
Dismiss; Opinion Filed September 3, 2020

In t he 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 01397
- CV COREY STEELE , Appellant

V. UG NATIONAL CONSTRUC TIVE AND CY ADDISON HOSPITALITY PARTNER S, LLC, Appellees On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 19
- 07861
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Carlyle, and Browning

Opinion by Justice Carlyle This appeal was filed November 11, 2019, and to date, the clerk’s record has not been filed because appellant has not paid for it. Although appellant filed in the trial court a statement of inability to afford payment of costs , the trial court sustained appellees’ challenge to appellant’s claim and ordered appellant, in relevant part, to pay the fee for the clerk’s record in installments of $250 per month until paid in full.
See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 145 (a), (f). We reviewed the trial court’s order on appellant’s
motion and, by opinio n dated May 18, 2020 , affirmed the order

. See Steele v. UG– 2

–

Nat’l Constructive , 05

- 19

- 01397

- CV, 2020 WL 2519895 (Tex. App.

— Dallas May 18, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.). Following our opinion, we ordered appellant to file, no later than June 5, 2020,
written ve rification he had paid the first installment. We subsequently extended the deadline to June 26, 2020. Although our orders setting the June 5th and June 26th deadlines cautioned appellant that failure to comply would result in the appeal being
dismissed wit hout further notice, appellant has not complied. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(b). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See id.

191397 F

. P 05 /Cory L. Carlyle/ CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE– 3

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
COREY STEELE, Appellant
No. 05

- 19

- 01397

- CV V.
UG NATIONAL CONSTRUCTIVE AND CY ADDISON HOSPITALITY PARTNERS, LLC, Appellees On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 19

- 07861. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle, Justices Molberg and Browning participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

Judgment entered this 3rd day of September , 2020.
Exhibit 13.1

Certification of the Principal Executive and Financial Officers of

CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V.

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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of CEMEX, S.A.B. de C.V. (the Company)
for the year ended December 31, 2016, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Fernando Ángel González Olivieri, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and José
Antonio González Flores, as Executive Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each 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 the best of 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 as of the dates and periods set forth therein.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|       |  |                                        
|------ |  | ---------------------------------------
|       |  | /s/ Fernando Ángel González Olivieri   
|Name:  |  | Fernando Ángel González Olivieri       
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer                
|Date:  |  | April 28, 2017                         
|       | 
|       |  | /s/ José Antonio González Flores       
|Name:  |  | José Antonio González Flores           
|Title: |  | Executive Vice President of Finance and
|       |  | Chief Financial Officer                
|Date:  |  | April 28, 2017                         

This certification is furnished as an exhibit to the Report and accompanies the Report pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
**Exhibit 31.2** **CERTIFICATION**     I, Dirkson R. Charles, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on    Form 10-Q    of K&F Industries, 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 registrant as of,    and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer 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))    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 report is    being prepared;     (b) 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     (c) 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    (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an    annual report) 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 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 registrant’s board of    directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):     (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. /s/  DIRKSON    R. CHARLES    Dirkson R. Charles    Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer     Date: November 6, 2006
# C_2009244EN.01000602.xml

| 10.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 244/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 244/6

---

Appeal brought on 17 July 2009 by Herbert Meister against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal delivered on 18 May 2009 in Joined Cases F-138/06 and F-37/08 Meister v OHIM

Meister

OHIM

(Case T-284/09 P)

2009/C 244/10

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Herbert Meister (Muchamiel, Spain) (represented by H.-J. Zimmermann, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought by the appellant

Form of order sought by the appellant

| — | That the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 May 2009 in Case F-37/08 Meister v OHIM be set aside; |
| --- | --- |

—

That the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 May 2009 in Case F-37/08 Meister v OHIM be set aside;

Meister

OHIM

| — | that OHIM be ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

that OHIM be ordered to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appeal is brought against the judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal of 18 May 2009 in Joined Cases F-138/06 and F-37/08 Meister v OHIM, in which, inter alia, the appellant’s pleas in Case F-37/08 were rejected.

Meister

OHIM

In support of his appeal, the appellant claims primarily that, the Civil Service Tribunal breached its duty of neutrality and objectivity, that it did not carry out an accurate assessment of the facts of the case but rather a one-sided assessment, and that it distorted the facts of the case. Furthermore, the Civil Service Tribunal is criticised for improper procedural confusion regarding the respective subject-matter of Case F-138/06 and Case F-37/08. In addition, the appellant alleges that the Civil Service Tribunal erred in law in its judgment on the facts of the case. Lastly, the appellant criticises the Civil Service Tribunal’s decision on costs.

The appellant takes the view that the Civil Service Tribunal, by its infringements, also breached its duty to provide lawful grounds for the judgment under appeal.

---
II-00997

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Lillian Abatan <labatan@earthlink.net>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:19 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Lillian Abatan

3737 W. 63rd St.

Chicago, IL 60629
II-00163

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Dave Reagan <owldave@cablelynx.com>

Saturday, December 4, 2010 10:07 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Dave Reagan

138 Circle Dr

Hot Springs, AR 71901
Kevin FUQUA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9482.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# C_2009267EN.01007502.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 267/75 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 267/75

---

Action brought on 31 August 2009 — Germany v Commission

(Case T-347/09)

2009/C 267/135

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and B. Klein)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare Commission Decision SG-Greffe (2009) D/3985 on State aid No NN 8/2009 of 2 July 2009 null and void, to the extent that the measures notified are categorised as State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare Commission Decision SG-Greffe (2009) D/3985 on State aid No NN 8/2009 of 2 July 2009 null and void, to the extent that the measures notified are categorised as State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC;

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

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant challenges Commission Decision K(2009) 5080, definitive since 2 July 2009, concerning aid rules which consist of, first, the free transfer of federally-owned national nature reserves and, second, support for large conservation projects (State aid NN 8/21009 — Germany — Conservation areas). In that decision, the Commission takes the view that the aid rules notified are compatible with the common market under Article 86(2) EC. The applicant challenges the contested decision, to the extent that the measures notified are categorised as State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC.

As the basis of its action, the applicant claims that the defendant incorrectly applied Article 87(1) EC in a number of respects. In that regard, it is submitted, inter alia, that the defendant wrongly categorises conservation organisations as undertakings and wrongly failed to carry out the necessary overall assessment of the measures referred to. Furthermore, the conservation organisations have obtained no material advantage for State aid purposes from the measures referred to. The applicant further complains of an incorrect application of the fourth criterion laid down by the Court of Justice in Case C-280/00 Altmark Trans und Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg [2003] ECR I-7747.

Altmark Trans und Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg

In the alternative, a breach of the duty to state reasons laid down in Article 253 EC is claimed.

---
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 34732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16301]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Finance Docket No. 34058]


Union Pacific Railroad Company--Trackage Rights Exemption--The 
Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company

    The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) has 
agreed to grant temporary overhead trackage rights to Union Pacific 
Railroad Company (UP) over 136.5 miles of BNSF trackage extending from 
BNSF milepost 2.7, near Pasco, WA, to BNSF milepost 11.8, near Spokane, 
WA.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On June 18, 2001, UP concurrently filed a petition for 
exemption in STB Finance Docket No. 34058 (Sub-No. 1), Union Pacific 
Railroad Company--Trackage Rights Exemption--The Burlington Northern 
and Santa Fe Railway Company, wherein UP requests that the Board 
permit the proposed temporary overhead trackage rights arrangement 
described in the present proceeding to expire on September 4, 2001. 
That petition will be addressed by the Board in a separate decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The transaction is scheduled to be consummated on June 26, 2001. 
The temporary trackage rights will facilitate maintenance work on UP's 
lines.
    As a condition to this exemption, any employees affected by the 
trackage rights will be protected by the conditions imposed in Norfolk 
and Western Ry. Co.--Trackage Rights--BN, 354 I.C.C. 605 (1978), as 
modified in Mendocino Coast Ry., Inc.--Lease and Operate, 360 I.C.C. 
653 (1980).
    This notice is filed under 49 CFR 1180.2(d)(7). If it contains 
false or misleading information, the exemption is void ab initio. 
Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed 
at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not automatically 
stay the transaction.
    An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB 
Finance Docket No. 34058 must be filed with the Surface Transportation 
Board, Office of the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, one copy of each pleading must 
be served on Robert T. Opal, Esq., Union Pacific Railroad Company, 1416 
Dodge Street, Room 830, Omaha, NE 68179.
    Board decisions and notices are available on our website at 
www.stb.dot.gov.

    Decided: June 22, 2001.

    By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of 
Proceedings.
Vernon A. Williams,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-16301 Filed 6-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
Exhibit 31.2

I, R. Jerry Giles, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Community Financial Corporation (the "Registrant");

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 consolidated financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the consolidated
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The Registrant's other certifying officer 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)) 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 report is being
prepared;

b) 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;

c) disclosed in this report any changes 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 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 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: February 12, 2007

/s/ R. Jerry Giles
R. Jerry Giles
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer