alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2008327EN.01000401.xml

| 20.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 327/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 327/4

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 November 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Regeringsrätten — Sweden) — Kollektivavtalsstiftelsen TRR Trygghetsrådet v Skatteverket

(Case C-291/07) (1)

1

(VAT - Place of taxable transactions - Place of supply for tax purposes - Service supplier established in a Member State other than that in which the customer is established - Status of taxable person - Services supplied to a national foundation carrying out both economic and non-economic activities)

(2008/C 327/06)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Regeringsrätten

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Kollektivavtalsstiftelsen TRR Trygghetsrådet

Applicant:

Defendant: Skatteverket

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regeringsrätten — Interpretation of Articles 9(2)(e) and 21(1)(b) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) and of Articles 56(1)(c) and 196 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) — National foundation which carries out both economic and other activities, using consultancy services supplied by a supplier established in another Member State in the context of its activities which do not fall within the scope of application of the Directive

Operative part of the judgment

Article 9(2)(e) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 1999/59/EC of 17 June 1999, and Article 56(1)(c) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that where the customer for consultancy services supplied by a taxable person established in another Member State carries out both an economic activity and an activity which falls outside the scope of those directives, that customer is to be regarded as a taxable person even where the supply is used solely for the purposes of the latter activity.

---

(1)  OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.

1

---
# C_2009055EN.01002302.xml

| 7.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/23

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 21 January 2009 — Hansgrohe v OHIM (AIRSHOWER)

(Case T-307/07) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Application for the Community word mark AIRSHOWER - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2009/C 55/41)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Hansgrohe AG (Schiltach, Germany) (represented by: S. Weidert and J. Zehnsdorf, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, initially, and G. Schneider and S. Schäffner, subsequently, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 31 May 2007 (Case R 1281/2006—1) concerning the registration of the word mark ‘AIRSHOWER’ as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Hansgrohe AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Hansgrohe AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 235, 6.10.2007.

1

---
No. 17,376.

#### Claire C. Wagner *v.*Erineo M. Montoyo.

(280 P. [2d] 1115)

Decided March 7, 1955.

Mr. Irving I. Oxman, Mr. George K. Thomas, for plaintiff in error.

Mr. John R. Wall, for defendant in error.

*En Banc.*

Per Curiam.

Judgment affirmed without written opinion.
(109 So. 789)

No. 27936.

#### STATE OF LOUISIANA v. Will NORRIS.

(June 28, 1926.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 5, 1926.)

Appeal from Fourth Judicial District Court, Parish of Ouachita; Percy Sand el, Judge.

George Wesley Smith, of Rayville, for appellant.

Percy Saint, Atty. Gen., Percy T. Ogden, Asst. Atty. Gen., David I. Garrett, Dist. Atty., of Monroe (E. R. Schowalter, Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel), for the State.

O’NIELL, C. J.

The defendant has appealed from a conviction and sentence for having whisky in his possession for beverage purposes. The facts of the case and the issues presented are the same as in the case of State v. Norris (No. 27935) 109 So. 787,1 in which the conviction and sentence were affirmed to-day. For the reasons given in the opinion rendered in that case, the verdict and sentence in this case are affirmed.

ST. PAUL, ROGERS, and BRUNOT, JJ., concur in the-decree..

1

 Ante, p. 988.
Note: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

2007-3057 

ALFRANZO T. DAVIS, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, 

Respondent. 

 Alfranzo T. Davis, of Louisville, Kentucky, pro se. 

 

 Joyce G. Friedman, Attorney, Office of the General Counsel, United States Merit 

Systems Protection Board, of Washington, DC, for respondent. With her on the brief 

were B. Chad Bungard, General Counsel, Rosa M. Koppel, Deputy General Counsel, 

and Rosalyn L. Wilcots, Acting Associate General Counsel. 

Appealed from: United States Merit Systems Protection Board 
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-3057 

 

ALFRANZO T. DAVIS, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, 

Respondent. 

__________________________ 

DECIDED: April 6, 2007 

__________________________ 

Before MAYER, RADER, Circuit Judges, and GARBIS, District Judge*

. 

PER CURIAM. 

 Alfranzo T. Davis appeals the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, 

dismissing his petition as untimely filed. Davis v. U.S. Postal Serv., CH-0752-06-0708-I1 (MSPB Nov. 15, 2006). We affirm. 

Davis was required to file his board appeal within 30 days of receiving notice of 

the Postal Service’s decision to remove him, or to show good cause why he was unable 

to timely file. 5 C.F.R. §§ 1201.12, 1201.22. Davis, however, filed more than 30 days 

 *

 Honorable Marvin Garbis, Sr. District Judge, United States District Court 

of Maryland, sitting by designation. 
after receiving the agency’s decision letter, and he failed to present the board with 

evidence of good cause. He did not argue before it that the medical records he now 

submits established good cause; and to the extent he so argues to this court, we do not 

infer good cause from them. Finally, Davis’ request that the board consider the date his 

grievance was resolved in determining when his 30 days began to run is without merit. 

His grievance was a separate proceeding, and does not affect the deadlines under 5 

C.F.R. § 1201.22. 

2007-3057 2
In the MATTER OF: D.L.W.

No. COA17-464

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 19, 2017

AFFIRMED.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 7348** 

ALEX D. TAYLOR , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. JON OZMINT, Director SCDC , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Aiken

. Terry L. Wooten , District Judge. ( 1:09

- cv
- 00915

- TLW )

Submitted : March 17, 2011 Decided: April 20, 2011

Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Alex D. Taylor, Ap pellant Pro Se. Andrew Lindemann, DAVIDSON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Alex D. Taylor appeals the district court ’ s order accepting the recommendat ion of the magistrate judge and denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (200 6 ) complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
Taylor v. Ozmint , No. 1:09

- cv
- 00915

- T LW (D.S.C. Sept. 16, 2010)

. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
November 29, 2011

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

JOHNNY JOE SALAZAR, Appellant

NO. 14-11-00985-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

____________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. The 

record indicates that the appeal should be DISMISSED. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion and that this decision be certified below for 

observance.
# C_2009113EN.01000901.xml

| 16.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 113/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 113/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 26 March 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-559/07) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Social policy - Article 141 EC - Equal pay for male and female workers - National civil and military pension regime - Different treatment with regard to retirement age and minimum required service - Justification - Absence)

2009/C 113/16

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Patakia and M. van Beek, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: F. Spathopoulos, K. Bokovits, A. Samoni-Rantou, E.-M. Mamouna and S. Vodina, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 141 EC — Infringement of the principle of equal pay for male and female workers — National civil and military retirement pensions regime prescribing a retirement age that can vary according to sex

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by maintaining in force provisions which provide for differences between male and female workers with regard to retirement age and minimum required service under the Greek Civil and Military Pensions Code instituted by Presidential Decree No 166/2000 of 3 July 2000, in the version applicable to the present case, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 141 EC; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by maintaining in force provisions which provide for differences between male and female workers with regard to retirement age and minimum required service under the Greek Civil and Military Pensions Code instituted by Presidential Decree No 166/2000 of 3 July 2000, in the version applicable to the present case, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 141 EC;

| 2. | Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 37, 9.2.2008.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56736-56737]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19293]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Portland Cement Association

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 7, 2005, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Portland Cement Association 
(``PCA'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in 
its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, the Rocky Mountain Concrete Promotion Council has changed 
its name to the Rocky Mountain Cement Council, Denver, CO.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and PCA intends to file additional 
written notification disclosing all changes in membership.

[[Page 56737]]

    On January 7, 1985, PCA filed its original notification pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice 
in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 
5, 1985 (50 FR 5015).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 31, 
2005. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on July 7, 2005 (70 FR 39339).

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 05-19293 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
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.                  

###### Government Printing Office

The Depository Library Council to the Public Printer (DLC) will meet on Sunday, October 16, 2005, through Wednesday, October 19, 2005, at Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill, in Washington DC. 

The sessions will take place from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Sunday through Tuesday, and 8 a.m. to 12 noon on Wednesday. The meeting will be held at the Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill, 400 New Jersey Avenue, NW., Washington DC. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the Federal Depository Library Program. All sessions are open to the public. There are no more sleeping rooms available at the Hyatt Regency Capitol Hill for the Government rate of $153 per night. We have made arrangements with the Red Roof Inn to get additional sleeping rooms for our attendees. The Red Roof Inn has offered us rooms for Saturday, October 15 through Wednesday, October 19. Rates will be $119.99 per night (plus tax) single or double. This rate will be honored through October 1, 2005. You can reserve your room by calling the hotel directly at 202-289-5959 and mention that you are with the U.S. Government Printing Office group and give them the block code of B254GPO. The Red Roof Inn is in compliance with the requirements of Title III of the Americans With Disabilities Act and meets all Fire Safety Act regulations. 

Bruce R. James,

Public Printer of the United States. 

[FR Doc. 05-19027 Filed 9-22-05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1520-01-P
Opinion filed October 9, 2008

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________

No. 11-08-00192-CV

__________

 RAYMOND FRANKE AND CECILIA FRANKE, Appellants

V.

 BRUCE A. CLARK & BRUCE C. CLARK, INTERVENOR, Appellees

On Appeal from the 42nd District Court

 Callahan County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 17,271

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The trial court signed its judgment on May 30, 2008. Appellants filed a notice of appeal but

did not file a motion for new trial. The appeal is dismissed.

Appellants have not filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs on appeal pursuant to TEX.R.

APP. P. 20.1. When the appellate record was not timely filed, the clerk of this court wrote the parties

advising them that the due date for the record had been extended. TEX.R. APP. P. 37.3(a)(1). Both

the clerk of the trial court and the court reporter have informed this court in writing that appellants

have failed to make arrangements to pay for the appellate record. On August 18, 2008, the clerk of
2

this court wrote the parties advising that the appeal would be subject to dismissal unless appellants

filed proof that they had made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record and the record was filed

in this court on or before October 2, 2008. There has been no response to our August 18 letter.

The failure to file the appellate record is due to appellants’ actions. TEX.R. APP. P. 37.3(b).

The appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

October 9, 2008

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.
**Exhibit 21.1**SUBSIDIARIES OF WINSTON HOTELS, INC.     The following is a list of certain direct and indirect subsidiaries of WinstonHotels, Inc., and their respective states of incorporation:   Name Jurisdiction of Incorporation WINN Limited Partnership ** North CarolinaBarclay Holding, Inc. DelawareBarclay Hospitality Services, Inc. North CarolinaMarsh Landing Lessee, LLC North CarolinaChapel Hill Lessee, LLC North CarolinaNew Stanley Associates Lessee, LLC DelawareGateway Hotel Lessee, LLC Delaware131 East Redwood (Tenant), LLC MarylandJacksonville Hotel Lessee, LLC DelawareHouston Lessee Project Company, LLC DelawareDes Moines Springhill Lessee Project Company, LLC DelawareShelton III Hotel Lessee Project Company LLC DelawareWCC GP, LLC DelawareWC Houston, LP DelawareWinston Kansas City, LP DelawareMarsh Landing Hotel Associates, LLC DelawareChapel Hill Hotel Associates, LLC North CarolinaNew Stanley Associates, LLLP ColoradoNew Stanley Associates, GP LLC DelawareGateway Hotel Associates, LLC Delaware131 East Redwood (Landlord), LLC MarylandBarclay Redwood Inc. DelawareBarclay Redwood Manager Inc. DelawareEvanston Hotel Associates, LLC DelawareJacksonville Hotel Associates, LLC DelawareWinston Kansas City, LP DelawareWinston Manager Corporation VirginiaWinston SPE, LLC VirginiaWinston Alpharetta SPE LLC DelawareWinston Ann Arbor SPE LLC DelawareWinston Atlanta HI SPE LLC DelawareWinston Cary HS SPE LLC DelawareWinston Charleston QS SPE LLC DelawareWinston Duluth HI SPE LLC DelawareWinston Durham HS SPE LLC DelawareWinston Elmsford SPE LLC DelawareWinston Houston CY SPE LLC DelawareWinston Houston HS SPE LLC DelawareWinston Lake Mary SPE LLC DelawareWinston Phoenix HS SPE LLC DelawareWinston Raleigh HS SPE LLC DelawareWinston Roanoke SPE LLC DelawareWinston Windsor SPE LLC DelawareWinston Manager II, LLC DelawareWinston SPE II, LLC DelawareWinston Finance Partners, LLC DelawareWinston Finance Partners II, LLC DelawareWinston Finance, LLC DelawareWinston Finance Charlotte, LLC DelawareWinston Opportunity Management, LLC North CarolinaWinston Hotels Opportunity Venture, LLC DelawareWCC Project Company, LLC DelawareWNC Project Company, LLC Delaware ** As of December 31, 2006, Winston Hotels, Inc. was the sole general partner andowned 95.74% of WINN Limited Partnership (also does business under: WINN LimitedPartnership of North Carolina (Florida), WINN Operating Limited Partnership(Texas) and North Carolina WINN Limited Partnership (Arizona)).
104
# CE2004078EN.01021101.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/211 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/211

---

(2004/C 78 E/0216)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3044/03

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 October 2003)

Subject:   Τ Pods

Subject:

Is the Commission aware of Τ Pods and does it plan to make Τ Pods mandatory?

Τ Pods are self-contained submersible computer and hydrophone units that recognise and log echo-location clicks from porpoises and dolphins and are manufactured in the UK.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 2003)

(10 November 2003)

Under the ‘Habitats’ Directive (1), the Member States must undertake surveillance of the conservation status of species of wild fauna of Community interest and take the requisite measures.

1

The Commission is paying very close attention to the research and data recording equipment used at sea (T Pods) mentioned by the Honourable Member, and all other technologies which help improve knowledge of the natural marine environment.

However, the Commission does not believe it is necessary to interfere in the choice of methods or technologies used for obtaining the data required for the surveillance activities of the Member States.

Consequently, the Commission does not plan to make the use of Τ Pods mandatory.

---

(1)  Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

1

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-60051 Summary Calendar

JOSEPH SHELTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus DENNIS E. PRESCOTT ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:95-CV-316-S-D

- - - - - - - - - - November 6, 1997 Before JONES, SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Joseph Shelton, Mississippi prisoner #59619, appeals from the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants in his civil rights complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He asserts that the district court erred in its determination that his allegations did not support his claim that prison officials were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties and AFFIRM the district court’s judgmentNo. 97-60051 -2- for essentially the same reasons adopted by the district court. Shelton v. Prescott et al. , No. 1:95CV316-S-D (N.D. Miss. Jan. 3, 1997). AFFIRMED.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

2008-3064 

DARRYL P. MITCHELL, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, 

 Respondent, 

and 

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, 

 Intervenor. 

Steven J. Plotkin, Law Office of Steven J. Plotkin, of Evanston, Illinois, argued for 

petitioner. 

Jeffrey A. Gauger, Attorney, Office of General Counsel, Merit Systems Protection 

Board, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent. With him on the brief were B. Chad 

Bungard, General Counsel, and Stephanie M. Conley, Acting Assistant General Counsel 

for Litigation. 

Allison Kidd-Miller, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, 

United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for intervenor. With her 

on the brief were Gregory G. Katsas, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. 

Davidson, Director, and Todd M. Hughes, Deputy Director. Of counsel on the brief was 

Teresa A. Gonsalves, Appellate Counsel, United States Postal Service, of Washington, 

DC. 

 

Appealed from: Merit Systems Protection Board 
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2008-3064 

DARRYL P. MITCHELL, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, 

 Respondent, 

and 

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, 

 Intervenor. 

Judgment 

ON APPEAL from the Merit systems Protection Board 

 

in CASE NO(S) CH0752070205-I-1. 

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

Per Curiam (BRYSON, LINN, and PROST, Circuit Judges.) 

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R.36 

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

DATED: _October 9, 2008____ / s / Jan Horbaly

 Jan Horbaly, Clerk