alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2023286EN.01003901.xml

| 14.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 286/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 286/39

---

Action brought on 26 June 2023 — AC Marca Brands v EUIPO — den Ouden (SANITIEN)

(Case T-345/23)

(2023/C 286/53)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Applicant: AC Marca Brands, SL (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: D. Pellisé Urquiza and J. C. Quero Navarro, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Julia den Ouden (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark SANITIEN — Application for registration No 18 384 320

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 April 2023 in Case R 1733/2022-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and/or Julia den Ouden to bear the costs of this action and of the opposition and appeal proceedings before EUIPO. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and/or Julia den Ouden to bear the costs of this action and of the opposition and appeal proceedings before EUIPO.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

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


<ARTICLE>                     5

     

<CIK>                         0000929426
<NAME>                        Merit Securities Corp.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 jul-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   sep-30-1996

<CASH>                                         10
<SECURITIES>                                   2,600,418
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              2,600,671
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,600,671
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          34,916
<BONDS>                                        2,649,020
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       10
<OTHER-SE>                                     96,725
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2,600,671
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               33,599
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               602
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               1,300
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             30,994
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                703
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            703
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   703
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>
----

|  /s/ Jeffry N.      Quinn                                         Jeffry      N. Quinn, Chairman of the Board,Chief      Executive Officer, and President(Principal      Executive Officer)  |  /s/ Frank      A. Metz, Jr.                                   Frank A. Metz, Jr.,      Director |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  /s/ James M.      Sullivan                                      James      M. Sullivan, Senior Vice Presidentand      Chief Financial Officer (PrincipalFinancial      Officer)                       |  /s/ J. Patrick      Mulcahy                                  J. Patrick Mulcahy,      Director  |
|  /s/ Timothy J.      Spihlman                                  Timothy      J. Spihlman, Vice President andController      (Principal Accounting Officer)                                                                  |  /s/ Sally G.      Narodick                                  Sally G. Narodick,      Director         |
|  /s/ Paul H.      Hatfield                                         Paul      H. Hatfield, Lead Director                                                                                 |  /s/ John B.      Slaughter                                  John B. Slaughter,      Director         |
|  /s/ Robert H.      Jenkins                                      Robert      H. Jenkins, Director                                                                                                      |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
STATE v. MIDDLETON.

No. COA07-355.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed February 5, 2008.

Certification Date February 25, 2008.

Appeal from Nash (99CRS7338, 99CRS7339).

Cases reported without published opinion. No error in part, remanded in part for resentencing.
[Cite as State v. Lewis , 2021-Ohio-477.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LAKE COUNTY, OHIO

STATE OF OHIO, : MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. 2021-L-012 - vs - : KENNY LEWIS a.k.a. KENY LEWIS a.k.a. KENYATTA LEWIS, :

Defendant-Appellant. :

Criminal Appeal from the Lake County Court of Common Pleas, Cas e No. 2010 CR 000649.

Jud g ment: Appeal dismissed.

Charles E. Coulson , Lake County Prosecutor, Lake County Administration Building, 105 Main Street, P.O. Box 490, Painesville, OH 44077 ( For Plaintiff-Appellee )

. Kenny Lewis , pro se , PID# A594-271, Marion Correctional Institution, 940 MarionWilliamsport Road, P.O. Box 57, Marion, OH 43302 ( Defendant-Appellant )

.

MARY JANE TRAPP, P.J. {¶1} On January 25, 2021, appellant, Kenny Lewis, pro se, filed a no tice of appeal from the trial court’s December 11, 2020 entry, which de nied his motion for leave to file a motion to correct a void sentence. A timely notice o f appeal was due no later than January 11, 2021, which was not a holiday or weekend. The appeal is untimely by fourteen days.2 {¶2} “* * * [A] party who wishes to appeal from an order that is fi nal upon its entry shall file the notice of appeal required by App.R. 3 with in 30 days of that entry.” App.R. 4(A)(1). {¶3} “(1) After the expiration of the thirty day period provided by App.R. 4(A) for the filing of a notice of appeal as of right, an appeal may be taken by a defendant with leave of the court to which the appeal is taken in the followin g classes of cases: {¶4} “(a) Criminal proceedings; * * * {¶5} “(2) A motion for leave to appeal shall be filed with the court of appeals and shall set forth the reasons for the failure of the appellan t to perfect an appeal as of right. * * *.” App.R. 5(A). {¶6} Appellant has neither complied with the thirty-day rule set for th in App.R. 4(A)(1) nor sought leave to appeal under App.R. 5(A). Thus, th is court is without jurisdiction to consider his appeal. Appellant has a remedy of filing an untimely criminal appeal under App.R. 5(A). {¶7} Appeal dismissed, sua sponte, as untimely.

CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J., THOMAS R. WRIGHT, J.,

concur.
Exhibit 13.1





Certification
Pursuant to


18
U.S.C. Section 1350,


as
Adopted Pursuant to


Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Industrias Bachoco,
S.A.B. de C.V., a sociedad
anónimabursatilde capital variableunder the laws of Mexico (the “Company”), does
hereby certify that, to the best of such officer’s knowledge:





1.
            The
      accompanying Report of the Company on Form 20-F for the year ended
      December 31, 2009 (the “Report”) fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and




2.
            Information
      contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the
    Company.




June 28,
2010





By:
              /s/Cristóbal Mondragón
    FragosoCristóbal
      Mondragón FragosoChief
      Executive Officer





June 28,
2010





By:
              /s/Daniel Salazar
      FerrerDaniel
      Salazar FerrerChief
      Financial Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Industrias Bachoco, S.A.B. de C.V. and will be retained by
Industrias Bachoco, S.A.B. de C.V. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.4
 
                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
 
To the Board of Directors of Sigma Coatings B.V.:
 
We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement of
PetroFina S.A. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-61145) of our report dated March 22,
1999, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of PetroFina S.A. for the year
ended December 31, 1998, relating to the balance sheets of Sigma Coatings B.V.
as of December 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996 and the related statements of income for
each of the years in the three year period ended December 31, 1998.
 
/s/ KPMG Accountants NV
 
KPMG Accountants NV
The Hague, the Netherlands
April 27, 1999
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT YONGQIANG M A, Pe titione r, v. ER IC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 12-71305 Age n c y No. A088-291-908 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 18, 2014 * * B e fore : ALAR C ÓN, O’ SC ANNLAIN, a nd FER N ANDEZ, C irc uit Judge s. Yongqia ng M a , a native and c itiz e n of C hina , pe titions for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a l s’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s de c i sion de ny i ng his a pplic at ion for a s y lum

and withholding 

# FIL ED MAR 3 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2). 1 2 - 7 1 3 0 5of re m ova l. W e hav e jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for

substa ntia l e vide nc e the a ge nc y ’ s fa c tua l findings, a p ply ing thesta

nda rds gove rning a dve rse c re dibility de te rm inations c re ate d by the RE AL ID Ac t. Shre stha v . Holde r , 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th C ir. 2010). W e de ny the pe tition for re vie w. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the B IA’ s a dve rse c re dibility de t e rm i nation, inc l uding inc onsiste nc ie s be twe e n M a ’ s te stim ony and writte n de c la

ration re ga rding whe the r a

writte n pe t ition wa s file d with thegove rnm e nt, whe n he le arne d a b out thea lle ge d c orrupt a c tivitie s, a s we ll a s disc re pa nc ie s re ga rding the doc um e ntation hesubm itte d in support of his visa a pplic ation. Se e id . at 1045-48 (substa ntia l e vide nc e supporte d a ge nc y ’ s a dve rse c re dibility finding under “ tota lity of the c irc um sta

n c e s” ). The a ge nc y

wa s not c om

p e lle d to a c c e pt M a ’ s e xpla nations for the se i nc onsiste nc ie s. S e e Zamanov

v . Holde r , 649 F.3d 969, 974 (9th C ir. 2011). In thea

bse nc e of c re dible te stim ony , M a ’ s a sy lum and withholding of rem o v a l c la im s fa il. Se e F a rah v . Ashc roft , 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th C ir. 2003). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

1 2 - 7 1 3 0 5 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1997
<CASH>                                           4,574
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,704
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,342
<INVENTORY>                                     61,291
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               116,034
<PP&E>                                          27,605
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,228
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 138,145
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           65,825
<BONDS>                                          6,749
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            57
<OTHER-SE>                                      65,394
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   138,145
<SALES>                                        173,471
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               173,471
<CGS>                                          134,977
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  134,977      
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   250
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,181
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,975
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,703
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,272
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,272
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.09
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lewis E. Dille, III, Appellant.

[801 NYS2d 199]

Appeal from a judgment of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry M. Himelein, J.), rendered March 29, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of manslaughter in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.15 [1]) in connection with the death of a 15-month-old child. The contention of defendant that County Court erred in accepting his *Alford*plea survives his waiver of the right to appeal to the extent that his contention implicates the voluntariness of the plea *(see People v Ebert,*15 AD3d 781, 782 [2005]). Nevertheless, by failing to move to withdraw the plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, defendant failed to preserve his contention for our review *(see People v DeJesus,*248 AD2d 1023 [1998], *lv denied*92 NY2d 878 [1998]), and this case does not fall within the rare exception to the preservation requirement *(see People v Toxey,*86 NY2d 725, 726 [1995], *rearg denied*86 NY2d 839 [1995]; *People v Lopez,*71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). The further contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel does not survive his plea of guilty inasmuch as there is no indication in the record that the plea *1299bargaining process was “infected by any allegedly ineffective assistance or that defendant entered the plea because of his attorney's] allegedly poor performance” *(People v Burke,*256 AD2d 1244, 1244 [1998], *lv denied*93 NY2d 851 [1999]; *see People v La Bar,*16 AD3d 1084, 1085). Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Smith and Lawton, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 10.9****Compensation Arrangements with Patrick G. Blanchard**     Georgia-Carolina Bancshares, Inc. (“Company”) has a written employment agreement with PatrickG. Blanchard, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. The Employment Agreement isfiled as Exhibit 10.1 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. Mr.Blanchard’s current (2007) annual salary is $175,000 and Mr. Blanchard is eligible for an annualincentive award under First Bank of Georgia’s Annual Incentive Plan, pursuant to which he received$25,316 in 2006. *See*Exhibit 10.8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December31, 2006 for a description of the Annual Incentive Plan. Mr. Blanchard’s Employment Agreemententitles him to certain payments following a change in control of the Company. Mr. Blanchard iseligible for stock option grants under the Company’s option plans as determined from time to timeby the Board of Directors of the Company. In addition, Mr. Blanchard participates in the Bank’smedical, dental, life and disability insurance plans and he may participate in the Company’s 401(k)plan. Mr. Blanchard also receives the following perquisites: payment of private and civic clubmembership dues, provision of an automobile and an automobile allowance. The aggregate value of these perquisites in 2006 wasless than $10,000.
EXHIBIT 14.(A). 3





March 31, 2004

Kost Forer and Gabbay
Certified Public Accountant
3 Aminadav Street
Tel-Aviv 67067

Gentlemen:

                RE: ALBAHEALTH LLC (HEREINAFTER - "THE COMPANY")

In connection with our examination of the financial statements of the Company
for the year ended December 31, 2003, we wish to advise you:

1.   We are aware that the financial statements of the Company, which we have
     examined, will be included in the consolidated financial statements of
     TEFRON LTD and our reports with respect to the financial statements of the
     Company will be relied upon by you.

2.   We hereby consent to the inclusion of our report relating to our
     examination of the financial statements of the Company covering the balance
     sheet as of December 31, 2003 and the related statements of income,
     members' equity, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2003, in
     the annual report of TEFRON LTD on Form 20F, which is to be filed with the
     U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (U.S. SEC) and to the incorporation
     by reference of such report into the Registration Statement on Form S-8
     (No. 333-111932).

3.   We are independent with respect to all entities in the TEFRON LTD group,
     under the rules of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
     and the U.S. SEC.

4.   We are familiar with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
     States of America and the financial statements of the above Company have
     been prepared in accordance with such principles.

5.   We are familiar with auditing standards generally accepted in the United
     States of America (U.S. GAAS) promulgated by the American Institute of
     Certified Public Accountants, and our examination with respect to the
     financial statements of the Company was conducted with U.S. GAAS.

6.   We are familiar with Regulation S-X and other published accounting rules
     and regulations of the U.S. SEC and the financial statements of the Company
     are prepared in accordance with, and contain the necessary disclosures
     required by, such rules and regulations.

Sincerely,


/s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
# C_2023235EN.01001801.xml

| 3.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 235/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 235/18

---

Appeal brought on 17 April 2023 by Societatea Naţională ‘Aeroportul Internaţional Timişoara — Traian Vuia’ SA (AITTV) against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber, Extended Composition) delivered on 8 February 2023 in Case T-522/20, Carpatair v Commission

(Case C-246/23 P)

(2023/C 235/22)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Societatea Naţională ‘Aeroportul Internaţional Timişoara — Traian Vuia’ SA (AITTV) (represented by: V. Power, R. Hourihan, Solicitors)

Other parties to the proceedings: Carpatair SA, European Commission, Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.)

Form of order sought

The Appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the General Court Judgment and dismiss the action for annulment brought by Carpatair against the Decision (1), and either give its own judgment in the matter dismissing Carpatair's case in full (including its third and fourth pleas left undecided by the General Court) or remit the matter to the General Court for a rehearing, and |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the General Court Judgment and dismiss the action for annulment brought by Carpatair against the Decision (1), and either give its own judgment in the matter dismissing Carpatair's case in full (including its third and fourth pleas left undecided by the General Court) or remit the matter to the General Court for a rehearing, and

| — | reserve the question of Carpatair's and AITTV's costs if the case is remitted to the General Court or, if this Honourable Court substitutes its own judgement then order Carpatair to pay its own costs and those of AITTV at first instance and on appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

reserve the question of Carpatair's and AITTV's costs if the case is remitted to the General Court or, if this Honourable Court substitutes its own judgement then order Carpatair to pay its own costs and those of AITTV at first instance and on appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Appellant submits that the judgment under appeal should be set aside on the following grounds:

Plea 1 — erred in law by deeming Carpatair's action admissible despite Carpatair not being ‘substantially affected’ by the contested arrangements;

Plea 2 — erred in law in finding that the arrangements were selective;

Plea 3 — erred in law by rejecting the admissibility of the ex ante assessment;

Plea 4 — disregarded relevant considerations (e.g., by deeming the Oxera report as ‘irrelevant’), and

Plea 5 — failed to sufficiently take into account evidence submitted by the Commission, Wizz and AITTV relating to the material lack of competition between Wizz and Carpatair when the arrangements were concluded.

---

(1)  Commission Decision (EU) 2021/1428 of 24 February 2020 ON THE STATE AID SA.31662 — C/2011 (ex NN/2011) implemented by Romania for Timișoara International Airport — Wizz Air (OJ 2021, L 308, p. 1).

---