alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
REGISTER et al. v. GREEN BULL GEORGIA PARTNERS, LLC et al.

Green Bull Georgia Partners, LLC et al. v. Register et al.

Mills v. Register et al.

S17A0324 S17X0325 S17X0326

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Decided June 19, 2017

Thomas C. James, III, General Counsel, William Patrick Horkan, James, Bates, Brannan, Goover LLP, 231 Riverside Drive, Macon, Georgia 31201, for Appellant in S17A0324.

Stuart Ellis Walker, John T. McGoldrick, Jr., General Counsel, Martin Snow, LLP, 240 Third Street, Macon, Georgia 31202, for Appellee in S17A0324.

John Wesley Mills, III, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, 3343 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 1150, Atlanta, Georgia 30326-1428, Amanda Rodman Smith, John Ellsworth Hall, IV, Hall, Bloch, Garland & Meyer, LLP, P. O. Box 5088, Macon, Georgia 31208-5088, Ivy Neal Cadle, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, P.C., P.O. Box 5047, Macon, Georgia 31208-5047, for Other Party in S17A0324, S17X0325.

Stuart Ellis Walker, John T. McGoldrick, Jr., General Counsel, Martin Snow, LLP, 240 Third Street, Macon, Georgia 31202, for Appellant in S17X0325.

Thomas C. James, III, General Counsel, William Patrick Horkan, James, Bates, Brannan, Goover LLP, 231 Riverside Drive, Macon, Georgia 31201, for Appellee in S17X0325 and S17X0326.

John Wesley Mills, III, Barnes & Thornburg LLP, 3343 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 1150, Atlanta, Georgia 30326-1428, Amanda Rodman Smith, John Ellsworth Hall, IV, Hall, Bloch, Garland & Meyer, LLP, P. O. Box 5088, Macon, Georgia 31208-5088, for Appellant in S17X0326.

Stuart Ellis Walker, John T. McGoldrick, Jr., General Counsel, Martin Snow, LLP, 240 Third Street, Macon, Georgia 31202, Ivy Neal Cadle, Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, P.C., P.O. Box 5047, Macon, Georgia 31208-5047, for Other Party in S17X0326.

Per Curiam.

The judgments of the court below are affirmed without opinion pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 59.

*Affirmed without opinion* .

All the Justices concur, except Peterson, J., not participating
**Exhibit3.2**

 

**ARTICLESOF AMENDMENT TOTHIRD RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATIONOFMETRO ONE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.**

 

Pursuant to ORS 60.447,Metro One Telecommunications, Inc., an Oregon corporation (the “Corporation”),submits for filing these Articles of Amendment.

 

The Corporation herebycertifies that:

 

1.     The name of the Corporationis Metro One Telecommunications, Inc.

 

2.     The first sentence ofParagraph A of Article VIII is hereby amended in its entirety to read asfollows:

 

“The number of directorsof the Corporation shall not be less than three nor more than nine, and withinsuch limits, the exact number shall be fixed and increased or decreased fromtime to time by resolution of the Board of Directors.”

 

3.     The date of adoption of theamendment set forth in Paragraph 2 (the “Amendment”) was May 28, 2003.

 

4.     The Amendment requiredshareholder approval.  The shareholdervote on the Amendment was as follows:

 
| **Class or Series  of Shares** |   | **Number of  Shares  Outstanding** |   | **Number of  Votes  Entitled to be Cast** |   | **Number of  Votes  Cast FOR** |   | **Number of  Votes  Cast AGAINST** |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------|--------|
| Common  Stock                  |   | 24,682,318                         |   | 24,682,318                                |   | 19,216,967                     |   | 3,219,816                          |   |

 

 
|   | METRO ONE  TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. |
|--------|-------------------------------------|
|   |                                |   |
|   |                                |
|   | By:                                 | /s/ Gary E. Henry |   |
|   |                                | Gary E. Henry,  Secretary |
|        |                                     |  |  |  |  |

 

----
Filed 10/23/12 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2012 ND 213

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Robert Doyle Jones, Jr., Defendant and Appellant

No. 20120165

Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Wade L. Webb, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Tristan J. Van de Streek (appeared), Assistant State’s Attorney, and Ross Pearson (argued), third-year law student, under the Rule on Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, Courthouse, P.O. Box 2806, Fargo, N.D. 58108-2806, for plaintiff and appellee.

Thomas M. Jackson, 418 East Rosser Avenue, Suite 320, Bismarck, N.D. 58501, for defendant and appellant.

State v. Jones

No. 20120165

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Robert Jones, Jr. appealed from a criminal judgment entered upon an Alford plea of guilty to the charge of forgery.  On appeal, Jones argues the district court judge should have disqualified himself from the case under Canon 3 of the North Dakota Code of Judicial Conduct and failed to inquire whether Jones waived disqualification.  Jones also argues the court erred when it allowed him to enter the plea after requesting a psychological evaluation.  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).  See also State v. Jones, 2011 ND 234, 817 N.W.2d 313.

[¶2]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom
Julia NICHOLS, Petitioner, v. The UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL, Respondent.

No. COA16-1117

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: August 15, 2017

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATION OF CFO OF PERIODIC REPORT**     The undersigned, Timothy A. Bienek, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer ofAffirmative Insurance Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”), certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:(1) the Interim Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2005 (the“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Dated: August 15, 2005       /s/ Timothy A. Bienek     Timothy A. Bienek  Executive Vice President and Chief  Financial Officer (Principal Financial
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 41 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 41

    To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal 
    Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood 
                           Insurance Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2013

 Mr. Garrett (for himself, Mr. Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Frelinghuysen, 
Mr. Lance, Mr. Grimm, Mr. Hanna, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Meeks, Mrs. 
Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, Mrs. McCarthy of New York, Mr. Crowley, 
 Mr. Nadler, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Runyan, Mr. LoBiondo, Ms. Meng, Mr. Sean 
Patrick Maloney of New York, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Tonko, and Mr. Bishop of 
  New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on 
the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, 
 in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal 
    Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood 
                           Insurance Program.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY INCREASE IN BORROWING AUTHORITY FOR NATIONAL FLOOD 
              INSURANCE PROGRAM.

    (a) Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 
U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking ``$20,725,000,000'' and 
inserting ``$30,425,000,000''.
    (b) The amount provided by this section is designated by the 
Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 403(a) of S. 
Con. Res. 13 (111th Congress), the concurrent resolution on the budget 
for fiscal year 2010, and as an emergency pursuant to section 4(g) of 
the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 933(g)).
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-7690

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JOYCE TORIAN THOMPSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CR-87-53-BR, CA-97-699-5-BR) Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 20, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Joyce Torian Thompson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Joyce Thompson seeks to appeal the district court’s order refusing to entertain a successive motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998), without authorization from this court. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. The district court acted in accordance with the dictates of § 2255. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We deny Thompson’s motion for oral argument. 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.

DISMISSED
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT AND REPORT ON SCHEDULES


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-02718 of Comcast UK Cable Partners Limited and subsidiaries (the "Company")
on Form S-8 of our reports on Comcast UK Cable Partners Limited and subsidiaries
dated February 27, 1998, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Comcast UK Cable Partners Limited and subsidiaries for the year ended December
31, 1997, and on Cambridge Holding Company Limited and subsidiaries dated
February 29, 1996, incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K
of Comcast UK Cable Partners Limited and subsidiaries for the year ended
December 31, 1997.

Our audits of the financial statements referred to in our aforementioned report
also included the financial statement schedules of the Company, listed in Item
14(b)(i). These financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audits. In our opinion, such financial statement schedules, when considered in
relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly in
all material respects the information set forth therein.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 23, 1998
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

ROY ALAN WRIGHT, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-146

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed November 9, 2018. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pasco 

County; Mary M. Handsel, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, 

and Stephania A. Gournaris Assistant 

Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and David Campbell, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

CASANUEVA, KELLY, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
# C_2008247EN.01S00301.xml

| 27.9.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 247/s3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 247/s3

---

NOTE TO THE READER

NOTE TO THE READER

The institutions have decided no longer to quote in their texts the last amendment to cited acts.

Unless otherwise indicated, references to acts in the texts published here are to the version of those acts currently in force.

---
STATE of North Carolina v. Jimmy Lee GANN

No. 243PA16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017.

David Weiss, Attorney at Law, for Gann, Jimmy Lee.

Teresa M. Postell, Assistant Attorney General, Todd Williams, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 27th of June 2016 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 27th of June 2016 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:

"Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."
STATE v. Mohammed Nasser JILANI

139P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 8, 2017

Mohammed Nasser Jilani, for Jilani, Mohammed Nasser.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, N. Lorrin Freeman, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 25th of April 2017 by Defendant for Writ of Prohibition:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 8th of June 2017."
SENIOR RIDE CONNECTION, f/k/a ITNCharleston Trident, Appellant, v. ITNAMERICA, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2017-000024

Court of Appeals of South Carolina.

September 8, 2017

ORDER

It appears to the satisfaction of the Court that the above case has been fully and finally settled by agreement between the parties. Accordingly, this matter is dismissed. The remittitur will be sent as provided by Rule 221(b) of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules.
# Official Journal C 64A/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.CA2010.064.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 64A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5316 March 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.CA2010.064.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 64A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5316 March 2010

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2010/C 064A/01 | Notice of open competition EPSO/AD/177/10 — Administrators (AD 5) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2010/C 064A/01

Notice of open competition EPSO/AD/177/10 — Administrators (AD 5)

1

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OJs

Please find below the list of C A published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, OJs are published in all language versions.

| 5 | (FR) |
| --- | --- |
| 9 | |
| 19 | (FR) |
| 23 | (DE/ES/PT) |
| 28 | |
| 48 | |
| 53 | |
| 56 | |
| 57 | |
| 60 | |
| 61 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 62 | |
| 64 | |

5

(FR)

9

19

(FR)

23

(DE/ES/PT)

28

48

53

56

57

60

61

(DE/EN/FR)

62

64

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

November 19, 2020

No. 04

- 19

- 00119

- CV

INFINITY COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

, Appellant

v.

Michael TATSCH

, Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court

, Gillespie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 12977

Honorable N. Keith Williams , Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice 1

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice 1

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

A majority of the court has voted to GRANT Appellee’s motion for en banc

reconsideration. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 49.7. “[T] he panel’s [ June 24, 2020 opinion and judgment ]

do es not become final, and t he case will be resubmitted to the c ourt for en banc review and

disposition. ” See I d

.

Entered this 19 t h day of November , 2020.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

_________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, C lerk of Court

1 D issent s from the order granting en banc reconsideratio n
EXHIBIT 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
period ended  September 30, 2005 (the "Report") of BV  Pharmaceutical,  Inc., as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  I, Art  Bandenieks,  Chief Executive  Officer of BV  Pharmaceutical,
Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on 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 operations
          of the Company.


Dated: November 9, 2005                      /s/ ART BANDENIEKS
                                             ____________________________
                                                 Art Bandenieks
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

VARDUHI SASHOYAN,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 71510

Agency No. A097

- 364

- 365

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 1 4

, 2020 * *

Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Varduhi Sashoyan, a citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of an order from

the Board of Immi gration Appeals (“BIA”) denying her motion to reopen removal

proceedings . We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny in part and

dismiss in part the petition.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# F ILED

DEC 16 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 18

- 71510

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Sashoyan’s motion based on

her allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel and judicial bias. See Cuenca v.

Barr

, 956 F.3d 1079, 1084 (9th Cir. 2020)

. The BIA’s determination that Sashoyan

failed to demonstrate the requisite prejudice to substantiate her ineffective assistance

of counsel and due process claims was not arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law

.

See Agonafer v. Sessions , 859 F.3d 1198, 1203 (9th Cir. 2017)

. Nor did the BIA err

by determining Sashoyan failed to demonstrate that she acted with the neces sary

diligence to warrant equitable tollin g and dismissing the motion as untimely

. See

Iturribarria v. INS , 321 F.3d 889, 897 (9th Cir. 2003)

.

Sashoyan also contends that her mental health constitutes an exceptional

circumstance such that the BIA erred by declining to sua sponte reopen her

proceedings. We generally lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to

exercise its sua sponte authority, and Sashoyan does not allege a legal or

constitutional error necessary to invoke our jurisdiction. See Bonilla v. Lynch , 840

F.3d 575, 588 (9th Cir. 2016).

PETITION DENIED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART

.
STATE of North Carolina v. Rocky Kurt WILLIAMSON

No. 66PA17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

September 28, 2017

Ann B. Petersen, Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill, Amanda Tomblyn, for Williamson, Rocky Kurt.

James R. Glover, Attorney at Law, Chapel Hill.

Kathryn E. Hathcock, Assistant Attorney General, Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy *187Attorney General, L. Johnson Britt, III, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

***AMENDED ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 27th of February 2017 by State of NC for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 27th of February 2017 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:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."

State's petition for discretionary review is allowed for the limited purpose of vacating the decision of the Court of Appeals and remanding to that court with instructions for further remand to the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing on defendant's motion for appropriate relief based on recanted testimony, following the standard set forth in this Court's opinion in *State v. Britt* , 320 N.C. 705, 360 S.E.2d 660 (1987), *superseded in part on other grounds by statute as stated in**State v. Defoe* , 364 N.C. 29, 33-38, 691 S.E.2d 1, 4-7 (2010). The trial court shall enter findings of fact and conclusions of law and determine whether defendant is entitled to relief.:

"Spec Order by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 27th of February 2017 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of September 2017."
# C_2011232EN.01002902.xml

| 6.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 232/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/29

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 10 June 2011 — Eurallumina v Commission

(Case T-207/07 R)

(Application for interim measures - State aid - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the common market and ordering its recovery - Application for suspension of operation - No urgency)

(2011/C 232/52)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Eurallumina SpA (Portoscuso, Italy) (represented by: L. Martin Alegi and R. Denton, solicitors)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: N. Khan and D. Grespan, Agents)

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of Commission Decision 2007/375/EC of 7 February 2007 concerning the exemption from excise duty on mineral oils used as fuel for alumina production in Gardanne, in the Shannon region and in Sardinia implemented by France, Ireland and Italy respectively (C 78/2001 (ex NN 22/01), C 79/2001 (ex NN 23/01), C 80/2001 (ex NN 26/01)) (OJ 2007 L 147, p. 29), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | Costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Costs are reserved.

---
----

Removal from the register of Case C-69/04 (1)

(2005/C 106/43)

(Language of the case: Italian)

By order of 4 February 2005, the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-69/04 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Civitavecchia (Italy)): Ligabue Gate Gourmet Roma SpA, in liquidation v LSG Sky Chefs SpA. and European Avia Service SpA v Abela Italia SpA.

----

(1)OJ C 94 of 17.04.2004.

----