alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009141EN.01005301.xml

| 20.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 141/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/53

---

Action brought on 10 April 2009 — Dover v Parliament

(Case T-149/09)

2009/C 141/108

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Densmore Ronald Dover (Borehamwood, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Vaughan, QC Barrister, M. Lester, Barrister and M. French, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | annulment of contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annulment of contested decision;

| — | measures of organisation pursuant to Article 64 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, as specified in the application; |
| --- | --- |

—

measures of organisation pursuant to Article 64 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, as specified in the application;

| — | order that the Parliament pays the applicant’s costs on this action. |
| --- | --- |

—

order that the Parliament pays the applicant’s costs on this action.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of the present application the applicant seeks the annulment of Parliament Decision D(2009) 4639 of 29 January 2009 concerning the recovery of the parliamentary assistance allowance.

In support of his application, the applicant puts forward five pleas in law.

First, he claims that the Parliament has misinterpreted and misapplied Article 14 of the Rules governing the payment of expenses and allowances to members of the European Parliament (PEAM Rules), inter alia by seeking to impose, with retrospective effect, onerous requirements on the applicant which were never requirements on MEPs at the relevant time and by failing to identify precisely which item of expenditure is considered to have been paid unduly.

Second, he submits that the Parliament has relied on an alleged ‘conflict of interest’ with violation of the principle of legal certainty as it acted incompatibly with past custom and practice, inconsistently with its published rules, and without setting out clear and transparent standards. The applicant claims that the Parliament decision lacks any legal or factual basis.

Third, the applicant argues that the Parliament has not complied with the fundamental procedural requirements of Article 27 of the PEAM Rules inter alia regarding the prior consultation of the quaestors, justifying the ‘exceptional case’ circumstances, hearing the applicant before a decision had been taken as well as the requirement of a decision that should be taken by the Bureau.

Fourth, he contends that the defendant has sought to reclaim VAT from the applicant without having legal basis for doing so.

Finally, the applicant claims that the Parliament has referred the applicant’s case to OLAF prematurely, in breach of the applicant’s right of defence and without legal basis or justification.

---
MOUNT LEMMON FIRE DISTRICT, petitioner, v. John GUIDO, et al.

No. 17-587.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Motion of petitioner to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.
# L_2005239EN.01005901.xml

| 15.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 239/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 239/59

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 69/2005

of 29 April 2005

amending Annex XXI (Statistics) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex XXI to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 43/2005 of 11 March 2005 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex XXI to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 43/2005 of 11 March 2005 (1).

| (2) | Commission Decision 2004/883/EC of 10 December 2004 adjusting the Annex to Council Directive 95/57/EC on the collection of statistical information in the field of tourism as regards country lists (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Decision 2004/883/EC of 10 December 2004 adjusting the Annex to Council Directive 95/57/EC on the collection of statistical information in the field of tourism as regards country lists (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 7c (Council Directive 95/57/EC) of Annex XXI to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32004 D 0883: Commission Decision 2004/883/EC of 10 December 2004 (OJ L 373, 21.12.2004, p. 69).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32004 D 0883: Commission Decision 2004/883/EC of 10 December 2004 (OJ L 373, 21.12.2004, p. 69).’

Article 2

The text of Decision 2004/883/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 30 April 2005, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 29 April 2005.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Richard WRIGHT

---

(1)  
  OJ L 198, 28.7.2005, p. 45.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 373, 21.12.2004, p. 69.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. AS OF
AND FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED AUGUST 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1996
<CASH>                                              17
<SECURITIES>                                     1,010
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,550
<ALLOWANCES>                                       239
<INVENTORY>                                        668
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,769
<PP&E>                                           7,490
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,024
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,487
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,033
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            40
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,790
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,487
<SALES>                                          5,297
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,419
<CGS>                                            3,932
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,295
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     7
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    60
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (10)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (883)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (372)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (511)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (511)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Not required to be calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Erik Lindsey HUGHES, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-155.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Motion of Law Professors in support of neither party for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted.
# C_2011282EN.01001702.xml

| 24.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/17

---

Order of the General Court of 4 July 2011 — Sepracor Pharmaceuticals v Commission

(Case T-275/09) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Medicinal products for human use - Active substance eszopiclone - Marketing authorisation - Refusal of recognition as a new active substance - Act not amenable to review - Inadmissibility)

2011/C 282/31

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Sepracor Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: I. Dodds-Smith, Solicitor, D. Anderson QC, and J. Stratford, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Sipos, and subsequently by M. Wilderspin and M. Šimerdová, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

ACTION for annulment of the decision in the letter of the Commission addressed to the applicant on 6 May 2009 in the context of the procedure for authorising the placing on the market of Lunivia, inasmuch as it concerns classification of the active substance eszopiclone

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Sepracor Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Ltd shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Sepracor Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Ltd shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 220, 12.9.2009.

1

---
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TERRANCE L. McCLOUD,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-3176

[January 31, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Marina Garcia-Wood, Judge; L.T. Case No. 07-

21816CF10A.

Terrance L. McCloud, Crawfordville, pro se.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Deborah Koenig, 

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, LEVINE and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Michael D. HICKINGBOTTOM, petitioner, v. INDIANA.

No. 16-9643.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Indiana, Fifth District denied.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors 

Adolor Corporation: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theregistration statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-134647, No. 333-51222, No. 333-62428, No. 333-100585, and No. 333-105912) and registration statement on Form S-1 (No. 333-64298) of Adolor Corporation of our reports datedFebruary 27, 2008, with respect to the balance sheet of Adolor Corporation as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related statements of operations, comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years inthe three-year period ended December 31, 2007, and for the period from August 9, 1993 (inception) to December 31, 2007, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, which reportsappear in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of Adolor Corporation. 

Our report dated February 27, 2008 on the financial statementsrefers to the adoption of the fair value method of accounting for stock-based compensation as required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R),*Share-Based Payment*. 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Philadelphia Pennsylvania 

February 27, 2008
# L_2005165EN.01001401.xml

| 25.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 165/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 165/14

---

Notice concerning the entry into force of the Additional Protocol to the Europe Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Bulgaria, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Czech Republic, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic of Cyprus, the Republic of Latvia, the Republic of Lithuania, the Republic of Hungary, the Republic of Malta, the Republic of Poland, the Republic of Slovenia and the Slovak Republic to the European Union

The Additional Protocol to the Europe Agreement with Bulgaria, to take account of the accession of 10 new Member States to the European Union, which the Council and the Commission decided to conclude on 18 April 2005
   (1), enters into force on 1 July 2005, the last notification of the completion of procedures under Article 10 of that Protocol having been received on 13 June 2005.

1

---

(1)  
  OJ L 155, 17.6.2005, p. 1.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 34198]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16177]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Applicants

    Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed 
with the Federal Maritime Commission an application for licenses as 
Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder--Ocean 
Transportation Intermediary pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act 
of 1984 as amended (46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR part 515).
    Persons knowing of any reason why the following applicants should 
not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of 
Transportation Intermediaries, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, 
DC 20573.

Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier Ocean Transportation 
Intermediary Applicants

ARC Global Logistics, Inc., 7370 NW 36 Street, Suite 319K, Miami, FL 
33166, Officers: Rafael Perez, Secretary(Qualifying Individual), 
Christian Vucens, President
ACD Global Services, Inc., 1521 Northwest 82 Avenue, Miami, FL 33126, 
Officer: Maria Flores, President (Qualifying Individual)
Farenco Development Co., Ltd., One World Trade Center, Suite 2207, New 
York, NY 10048, Officers: Hanguang (Bright) Wang, CEO(Qualifying 
Individual), Lena Yu, President
ANG Bilis Bilis Air Cargo, Inc., dba Abacus Freight Forwarders, 2161 
Colorado Blvd., Suite #208, Los Angeles, CA 90041, Officers: Charity T. 
De Asis, Secretary (Qualifying Individual), Lenny Jose V. Gonzales, 
President
Unicorn Shipping Line, Inc., 14028 Tahiti Way, #409, Marina Del Ray, CA 
90292, Officer: Jie Liu, President(Qualifying Individual)

Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder 
Transportation Intermediary Applicants

Universe Freight Brokers, Inc., dba Seacarriers, 1620 NW. 82nd Avenue, 
Miami, FL 33126, Officer: Muricio Restrepo, President(Qualifying 
Individual)
TFS Freight International, Inc., 8901 S. LaCienega Blvd., Suite 207, 
Inglewood, CA 90301, Officers: Shally Liang, Secretary(Qualifying 
Individual), Victor Kuo, President
Worldwide Trade Logistics, Inc., 156-15 146 Avenue, Room 210, Jamaica, 
NY 11434, Officers: Raymond Fok, Vice President(Qualifying Individual), 
Lewis L. Liu, President
Braverman Enterprises, Inc., dba Customs Brokers International, 5777 W. 
Century Blvd., Ste. 535, Los Angeles, CA 90045, Officers: Carmen C. 
Braverman, President(Qualifying Individual), Robert A. Snyder, Vice 
President

Ocean Freight Forwarder--Ocean Transportation Intermediary 
Applicant

Eagle Pacific, Corp., 182-16 149th Road, Rm. #288, Jamaica, NY 11413, 
Officers: Luyin (Grace) Zhang, President(Qualifying Individual)

    Dated: June 22, 2001.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-16177 Filed 6-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
CHAE CHANG, petitioner, v. Scott FRAUENHEIM, Warden.

No. 17-7221.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Johnny Roy TARVER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7975.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C SECTION 1350
                AND SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the report of Rezconnect Technologies, Inc (the "Company") on
form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 filed herewith (the "Report")
I, Michael Y. Brent, Chief Executive Officer, of the Company, certify, 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 the Company.

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sabanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sabanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.


Dated: as of December 6, 2002


/s/ Michael Y. Brent
----------------------------------------
Michael Y. Brent, Chief Executive Officer
# C_2009267EN.01007501.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 1 September 2009 — Amecke Fruchtsaft v OHIM — Beate Uhse (69 Sex up)

(Case T-343/09)

2009/C 267/134

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Amecke Fruchtsaft GmbH & Co. KG (Menden, Germany) (represented by: R. Kaase and J.-C. Plate)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Beate Uhse Einzelhandels GmbH

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare admissible the action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 June 2009 in Case R 1728/2008-1; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare admissible the action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 June 2009 in Case R 1728/2008-1;

| — | Annul the contested decision on the ground of infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009; (1) |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the contested decision on the ground of infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009; (1)

1

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs, including the costs of the opposition and the appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs, including the costs of the opposition and the appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Beate Uhse Einzelhandels GmbH.

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: the word mark “69 Sex up” for goods and services in Classes 32 and 41 (Application No 5 274 303).

Community trade mark concerned:

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

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

Mark or sign cited in opposition: German word mark “sex:h:up” for goods in classes 5, 29, 30 and 32 (No 30 531 669), although the opposition was directed solely against the registration for goods in class 32.

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: allow the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: annulment of the contested decision and dismissal of the opposition.

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 in that there is a likelihood of confusion between the two marks.

Pleas in law:

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

1

---
Timothy H. JOHNSON, petitioner, v. Timothy FILSON, Warden, et al.

No. 17-7958.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 23, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 23.2

                CONSENT OF BDO SEIDMAN, LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

The Board of Directors
Pacific Magtron International Corp.

We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  in  the  Registration
Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-82918) and Form S-8 (No. 333-38994) of our report
dated  March 6, 2002  relating  to the  consolidated  financial  statements  and
schedule of Pacific  Magtron  International  Corp.  appearing  in the  Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.

/s/ BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
March 28, 2003
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ANDREW MITCHELL,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-805 

[June 14, 2018]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Edward H. Merrigan 

Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No. 07-16443CF10A.

Andrew Mitchell, Miami, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

TAYLOR, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
In Re Arthur O. ARMSTRONG, petitioner.

No. 17-7130.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
James GUNNELLS, petitioner, v. Larry CARTLEDGE, Warden.

No. 16-9645.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-16-0000070 15-FEB-2019 01:44 PM