alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009153EN.01003302.xml

| 4.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 153/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 153/33

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 7 May 2009 — NVV and Others v Commission

(Case T-151/05) (1)

1

(Competition - Concentrations - Markets for the purchase of live pigs or sows for slaughter - Decision declaring the concentration compatible with the common market - Definition of the relevant geographic market - Duty of care - Duty to state reasons)

2009/C 153/63

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Nederlandse Vakbond Varkenshouders (NVV) (Lunteren, Netherlands); Marius Schep (Lopik, Netherlands); and Nederlandse Bond van Handelaren in Vee (NBHV) (The Hague, Netherlands) (represented by: initially, J. Kneppelhout and M. van der Kaden and, subsequently, J. Kneppelhout, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: initially, A. Whelan and S. Noë and, subsequently, A. Bouquet and S. Noë, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Sovion NV (Best, Netherlands) (represented by: J. de Pree and W. Geursen, lawyers)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Annulment of the Commission decision of 21 December 2004 declaring a concentration compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement (Case No COMP/M.3605 — Sovion/HMG)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Nederlandse Vakbond Varkenshouders (NVV), Marius Schep and Nederlandse Bond van Handelaren in Vee (NBHV) to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission and by Sovion NV. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Nederlandse Vakbond Varkenshouders (NVV), Marius Schep and Nederlandse Bond van Handelaren in Vee (NBHV) to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission and by Sovion NV.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 9.7.2005.

1

---
STATE v. Philip Ray DAWKINS.

No. 83P04-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 13, 2016.

Bruce T. Cunningham, Jr., Southern Pines, for Dawkins, Philip Ray.

Daniel O'Brien, Assistant Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, for State of N.C.

T. Lynn Clodfelter, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 30th of March 2016 by Defendant to Hold Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Abeyance:

> "Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of April 2016."
STATE of North Carolina v. Erwin Lynn JARVIS.

No. COA 15-496.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Nov. 17, 2015.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-06-006-CV

NO. 2-06-155-CV

Ex Parte S.R.D., a child

In the Interest of B.G.D. a/k/a S.R.D., A Child	APPELLANT

	----------

	FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY	NO. 2-006  -04400    08-331              -CV

JOSEPH H. LEE, III, VIRGINIA K. LEE AND 	APPELLANTS

PATRICIA LEE BARROW AND SAVINGS 

OF AMERICA, INC.	DeEnNnNiIsS DeEwWaAyYnNeE PaAiIgGeE	   APPELLANT	

	V.

 OPAL LEE, IN HER CAPACITY AS 	APPELLEE

ReEsSsSiIeE OwWeEnNsS, ChHaAiIrRwWoOmMaAnN, 	APPELLEES

TeExXaAsS BoOaArRdD oOfF PrARdDoOnNsS aAnNdD PaArRoOlLeEsS TEMPORARY ADMINISTRATOR OF 

THE ESTATE OF DALE T. LEE, DECEASED	

	----------

	FROM THETHE 78TH78TH          PROBATE DISTRICT COURT  NO. 2 OF WICHITA                     TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered appellant’s [s’]REQrequest fo r the court to withdraw w his appeal.    appearthe c’ “Motion To Dismiss aAppealNotice Of Nonsuit.”  It is the court’s opinion that the request motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the appeal.  See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

	Costs of the appeal shall be paid by the appellants [ [s][- [oOR the the party incurring the same], for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:    GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ. 

    HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER                                     , JJ.

DELIVERED:    September 28, 2006  September 34, 2008August 289, 2008
# C_2008064EN.01003602.xml

| 8.3.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/36

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 January 2008 — Japan Tobacco v OHIM — Torrefacção Camelo (CAMELO)

(Case T-128/06) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition procedure - Application for the Community figurative mark CAMELO - Earlier national figurative mark CAMEL - Relative ground for refusal - No risk of profit derived unduly from, and no risk of detriment to, the distinctive character and reputation of the earlier mark - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - No infringement of the rules of the appeal procedure - Article 74 of Regulation No 40/94)

(2008/C 64/58)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Japan Tobacco, Inc. (Tokyo, Japan) (represented by: A. Ortiz López, S. Ferrandis González and E. Ochoa Santamaría, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Torrefacção Camelo Lda (Campo Maior, Portugal) (represented by: A. De Sampaio, I. Cavalho Franco and C. de Almeida Carvalho, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

da

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 22 February 2006 (Case R 669/2003-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Japan Tobacco, Inc. and Torrefacção Camelo Lda.

da

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Japan Tobacco, Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)(OHIM); |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Japan Tobacco, Inc. to bear its own costs and to pay those of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)(OHIM);

| 3. | Orders Torrefacção Camelo Lda to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Torrefacção Camelo Lda to bear its own costs.

da

---

(1)  OJ C 154, 1.7.2006.

1

---
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-05707, 333-21787 and 333-21769) and Form S-8 (File
Nos. 33-88606 and 333-19603) of Beacon Properties Corporation of our report
dated January 28, 1997 on our audits of the consolidated financial position of
Beacon Properties Corporation as of December 31, 1996 and 1995 and the
consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for the years ended
December 31, 1996 and 1995 and the period May 26, 1994 to December 31, 1994 and
the combined results of operations and cash flows of The Beacon Group,
predecessor to Beacon Properties Corporation, for the period January 1, 1994 to
May 25, 1994, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We
also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report on the financial
statement schedules of Beacon Properties Corporation as of December 31, 1996.




                                               COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Boston, Massachusetts
March 26, 1997
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of RAIT Financial Trust (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal ended December 31, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jack E. Salmon, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/    Jack E. SalmonName:

Jack E. SalmonTitle:

Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer


Date: March 2, 2009
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**








In
      connection with the annual report of BPC Holding Corporation and Berry Plastics
      Corporation (the “Registrants”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
      2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Ira G. Boots, the President and Chief Executive Officer of
      the Registrants, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrants.








/s/
      Ira G. Boots


Ira
      G.
      Boots


President
      and Chief Executive Officer





Date:  March
      22,
      2006
HOOD v. NC DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, et al.

No. 11P16-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 17, 2016.

Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for NC Dept. of Public Safety.

Robert Lee Hood, Badin, for Hood, Robert Lee.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th of January 2016 by Plaintiff for Notice of Appeal:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of March 2016."
UNPUBLISHED

 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

 No. 07-4266

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

JUSTIN BENJAMIN HASTE, JR., 

Defendant - Appellant. 

 

On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States. 

(S. Ct. No. 07-7412) 

 

Submitted: July 8, 2008 Decided: September 9, 2008 

Before KING and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit 

Judge. 

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, Eric D. Placke, 

Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for 

Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Robert A. 

J. Lang, Assistant United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North 

Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2

PER CURIAM: 

This case is before the court on remand from the United 

States Supreme Court. Justin Benjamin Haste, Jr., was previously 

convicted and sentenced to 180 months in prison after pleading 

guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to possession of a firearm by a 

felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 922(g)(1) and 924(e) (2000). 

Although Haste conceded he had two predicate offenses for armed 

career criminal status under the Armed Career Criminal Act (AACCA@), 

18 U.S.C. ' 924(e) (2000), he asserted before the district court 

and this court that a third conviction for felonious possession of 

a weapon of mass destruction under N.C. Gen. Stat. ' 14-288.8 

(2005) should not have been considered a Aviolent felony@ under the 

ACCA. We disagreed and affirmed the district court=s judgment. See

United States v. Haste, 234 F. App=x 70 (4th Cir. 2007) 

(unpublished). The Supreme Court vacated our judgment and remanded 

the case for further consideration in light of United States v. 

Begay, 128 S. Ct. 1581 (2008). Having carefully reviewed the 

Supreme Court=s opinion, we conclude that a violation of N.C. Gen. 

Stat. ' 14-288.8 is not a Aviolent felony@ under the ACCA. 

Accordingly, we vacate Haste=s sentence and remand this 

matter to the district court for resentencing consistent with this 

opinion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 
3

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

 VACATED AND REMANDED
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, 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 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.







|Dated:  May 14, 2010 | By:  _______________________
RALPH M. AMATO
Chief Executive Officer
|-------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 32.2

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to §906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

The undersigned, Chief Financial Officer of CP Limited Partnership (the “Company”), herebycertifies on the date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350(a), as adopted pursuant to §906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of CP Limited Partnership on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June, 2003 (the “Form10-Q”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

|                            | By:    | /s/ TAMARA D. FISCHER       |
|---------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------|
| Date:  August 8, 2003 |   |                             |
|                            | Name:  | **Tamara D. Fischer**       |
|                            | Title: | **Chief Financial Officer** |
STATE of North Carolina v. Jorge JUAREZ.

No. 360PA15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Jan. 28, 2016.

Emily H. Davis, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Juarez, Jorge.

Isham F. Hicks, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 26th of October 2015 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of January 2016."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 26th of October 2015 by State of NC in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of January 2016."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

# AGENCY:

National Science Foundation.

# ACTION:

Notice of permit modification request received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-541.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that the National Science Foundation (NSF) has received a request to modify a permit issued to conduct activities regulated under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L.  95-541; Code of Federal Regulations Title 45, Part 670), as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996.

# DATES:

Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or views with respect to the permit modification by October 19, 2005. The permit modification request may be inspected by interested parties at the Permit Office, address below.

# ADDRESSES:

Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dr. Polly A. Penhale or Nadene G. Kennedy at the above address or (703) 292-8030.

*Description of Permit Modification Requested:*                         On November 1, 2001, the National Science Foundation issued a Waste Management Permit (2002 WM-002) to Rennie S. Holt, Director, U.S. Antarctic Marine Living Resources (AMLR) Program, for the operation of a remote field camp at Cape Shirreff, Livingston Island, Antarctica. The permit holder wishes to modify this permit to include the use of doubly labeled water (tritiated and oxygen-18) to measure energetics in Antarctic fur seal pups. These radioisotopes will be added to the list of designated pollutants covered under the existing permit.                    

Approval of the modification requested will still ensure that waste management and regulatory requirements are met while providing a streamlined approach to waste management. The duration of the requested modification is coincident with the current permit which expires on April 30, 2006.

Nadene G. Kennedy,

Permit Officer.

[FR Doc. 05-18573 Filed 9-16-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
Of the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation. *

United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 08-1751

ROBERT FOXWORTH,

Petitioner, Appellee,

v.

PETER ST. AMAND,

Respondent, Appellant.

Before

 Lynch, Chief Judge,

Selya and Siler, Circuit Judges. *

ORDER FOR CERTIFICATION OF A QUESTION TO

THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Entered: June 29, 2009

For the reasons stated in our opinion of even date in

this case, submitted with this order, we certify the following

question to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts:

In considering the petitioner's application, filed in

2000, for leave to obtain further appellate review of the 1996

Massachusetts Appeals Court decision, did the Supreme Judicial

Court reopen the finality of the petitioner's 1992 conviction in

2002?
This court certifies that this question is determinative

of a claim in this case and that it appears to us that there is no

controlling precedent in either the decisions or rules of practice

of the Supreme Judicial Court.

In responding to this question, we invite any additional

guidance about relevant Massachusetts law or practice that the

Supreme Judicial Court may wish to offer.

The clerk of this court is to forward, under the official

seal of this court, a copy of the certified question and our

opinion in this case, along with the briefs and trial transcripts

filed by the parties, to the Supreme Judicial Court of

Massachusetts. Pending the receipt of a response, we shall retain

appellate jurisdiction.

By the Court

/s/ Richard C. Donovan, Clerk

United States Court of Appeals

for the First Circuit

 

[cc: Ms. Susan Mellen, Clerk, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court,

Hon. Rya W. Zobel, Ms. Sarah Thornton, Clerk, United States

District Court for the district of Massachusetts, Mr. John M.

Thompson, Ms. Susan G. Reardon & Ms. Linda J. Thompson.]
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.2
SECOND AMENDMENT TO ADVISORY AGREEMENT OF
PHILLIPS EDISON GROCERY CENTER REIT II, INC.


This Second Amendment (this “Second Amendment”) is made effective as of August 2, 2016, to the Advisory Agreement, dated December 3, 2015 (as amended, the “Advisory Agreement”), by and among Phillips Edison Grocery Center REIT II, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the “Company”), Phillips Edison Grocery Center Operating Partnership II, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Operating Partnership”), and Phillips Edison NTR II LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Advisor”).  Capitalized terms used but not defined herein will have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Advisory Agreement.
WHEREAS, the Company, the Operating Partnership and the Advisor previously entered into the Advisory Agreement on December 3, 2015; 
WHEREAS, the Advisory Agreement was amended on March 22, 2016; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26 of the Advisory Agreement, the Company, the Operating Partnership and the Advisor desire to further amend the Advisory Agreement in order to modify the terms thereof;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein and of other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree that the Advisory Agreement is hereby amended as follows:
		
	1.
	Amendments to Section 11. Sections 11(g)(iv) and 11(i) of the Advisory Agreement are deleted in their entirety and are of no further force and effect.




		
	2.
	Limited Effect; No Modifications. This Second Amendment is effective as of the date first set forth above.  The amendments set forth above shall be limited precisely as written and relate solely to the provisions of the Advisory Agreement in the manner and to the extent described above.  Except as expressly set forth herein, nothing contained in this Second Amendment will be deemed or construed to amend, supplement or modify the Advisory Agreement or otherwise affect the rights and obligations of any party thereto, all of which remain in full force and effect.




[Remainder of page intentionally left blank.]    











IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Second Amendment as of the date and year first above written.
	
			
	 
	 
	Phillips Edison Grocery Center REIT II, Inc.




By: /s/ R. Mark Addy
Name:R. Mark Addy
Title:President



	 
	 
	Phillips Edison Grocery Center Operating Partnership II, L.P.


By: PE Grocery Center OP GP II LLC, its general partner


By:Phillips Edison Grocery Center REIT II, Inc.,
its sole member




By: /s/ R. Mark Addy
Name:R. Mark Addy
Title:President



	 
	 
	Phillips Edison NTR II LLC




By: /s/ R. Mark Addy
Name:R. Mark Addy
Title:President
In the Matter of S.A.G.

No. COA15-466.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Nov. 17, 2015.

**Case Reported Without Published Opinion**

Affirmed.