alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007096EN.01003901.xml

| 28.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 96/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/39

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 29 March 2007 — Cwik v Commission

(Case F-31/05) (1)

1

(Officials - Appraisal - Career development report - 2003 appraisal procedure - Action for annulment - Plea of illegality - Manifest error of assessment)

(2007/C 96/80)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Michael Cwik (Tervuren, Belgium) (represented by: N. Lhoest, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: L. Lozano Palacios and J. Currall, agents)

Defendant:

Re:

First, application for annulment of his Career Development Report drawn up in respect of the period from 1 January to 31 December 2003 and, as far as necessary, of the decision of 24 January 2005 rejecting his complaint against the 2003 CDR and, secondly, an order that the Commission of the European Communities pay token damages of EUR 1.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 193, 6.8.2005 (Case initially registered before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities as case T-200/05 and transferred to the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union by order of 15.12.2005).

1

---
§ 310.15 Disposition of thyroid glands and laryngeal muscle tissue. ( a ) Livestock thyroid glands and laryngeal muscle tissue shall not be used for human food.
( b ) Livestock thyroid glands and laryngeal muscle tissue may be distributed to pharmaceutical manufacturers for pharmaceutical use in accordance with § 314.9 or § 325.19(c) of this subchapter, if they are labeled in accordance with § 316.13(f) of this subchapter. Otherwise, they shall be disposed of at the official establishment in accordance with § 314.1 or § 314.3 of this subchapter.
[53 FR 45890, Nov. 15, 1988]
I 

# fM-l.OIO-O~o5

I Contacts. With whom outside the FAA hasthis

### p~oposal been discussed? Organization Person Date Response

Contacted 

# I BA Padraci 

### 1/5/10 e~ail

McCausland RAA Dave Lotterer 

### 1/5/10 Left message I TCCA Anthony Wan 

### 1/4/10 email
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000913141
<NAME> CIGF-I

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       1,082,795
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  289,406
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               447,499
<PP&E>                                      16,080,646
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,527,143
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,373,203
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,324,850
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     7,048,357
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,373,203
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,955,142
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,963,642
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             311,247
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,319,747)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,319,747)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,319,747)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# C_2013325EN.01003001.xml

| 9.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 325/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 September 2013 — Roca v Commission

(Case T-412/10) (1)

1

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Coordination of price increases and exchange of sensitive business information - Attributability of the unlawful conduct - Fines - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Gravity of the infringement - Mitigating circumstances - Economic crisis - 2002 Leniency Notice - Reduction of the fine - Significant added value)

2013/C 325/50

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Roca (Saint Ouen l’Aumône, France) (represented by: P. Vidal Martínez, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by F. Castillo de la Torre, A. Antoniadis and F. Castilla Contreras, and subsequently by F. Castillo de la Torre, A. Antoniadis and F. Jimeno Fernández, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2010) 4185 final of 23 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.092 — Bathroom Fittings and Fixtures), and for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant in that decision.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Article 2(4)(b) of Commission Decision C(2010) 4185 final of 23 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.092 — Bathroom Fittings and Fixtures) in so far as the European Commission set the amount of the fine to be imposed on Roca jointly and severally without taking account of its cooperation; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Article 2(4)(b) of Commission Decision C(2010) 4185 final of 23 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.092 — Bathroom Fittings and Fixtures) in so far as the European Commission set the amount of the fine to be imposed on Roca jointly and severally without taking account of its cooperation;

| 2. | Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Roca in Article 2(4)(b) of Decision C(2010) 4185 final at EUR 6 298 000; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Sets the amount of the fine imposed on Roca in Article 2(4)(b) of Decision C(2010) 4185 final at EUR 6 298 000;

| 3. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 4. | Orders the Commission to pay one third of the costs incurred by Roca and to bear its own costs; |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the Commission to pay one third of the costs incurred by Roca and to bear its own costs;

| 5. | Orders Roca to bear two thirds of its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Orders Roca to bear two thirds of its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 301, 6.11.2010.

1

---
#### § 381.130 False or misleading labeling or containers; orders to withhold from use.

If the Administrator has reason to believe that any marking or other labeling or the size or form of any container in use or proposed for use with respect to any article subject to the Act is false or misleading in any particular, he may direct that the use of the article be withheld unless it is modified in such manner as the Administrator may prescribe so that it will not be false or misleading. If the person using or proposing to use the labeling or container does not accept the determination of the Administrator, he may request a hearing, but the use of the labeling or container shall, if the Administrator so directs, be withheld pending hearing and final determination by the Secretary in accordance with applicable rules of practice. Any such determination with respect to the matter by the Secretary shall be conclusive unless, within 30 days after the receipt of notice of such final determination, the person adversely affected thereby appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Circuit in which he has his principal place of business, or to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The provisions of section 204 of the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921, as amended, shall be applicable to appeals taken under this section.
#### § 350.5 Application for service.

Any person who desires to receive service under the regulations in this part for meat or other product eligible therefor under such regulations may make application for service to the Administrator, upon an application form which will be furnished by the Administrator upon request.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0583-0036)

[23 FR 9982, Dec. 23, 1958. Redesignated at 30 FR 4195, Mar. 31, 1965, and at 35 FR 15554, Oct. 3, 1970, and amended at 47 FR 746, Jan. 7, 1982]
NEWS: USDA Rural Development COVID-19 Response

USDA Rural Development has taken a number of immediate actions to help rural residents, businesses, and communities affected by the COVID-19 outbreak. Rural Development will keep our customers, partners, and stakeholders continuously updated as more actions are taken to better serve rural America. Please visit USDA Rural Development's Coronavirus Response page for the latest information and notices on how Rural Development is supporting its stakeholders.

**Oklahoma Rural Development State Office**100 USDA Suite 108Stillwater, OK  74074Phone: (800) 522-3819 Fax: (855) 423-4043

**Questions about Multifamily Housing Programs?**Call 1-800-292-8293

                          -    - State DirectorKenneth Corn (View Bio)
 
                          -                      View All State Contacts                   
                          -                        Follow the RD Oklahoma Office on X                     
                          -                        Receive Emails Through GovDelivery                     

## Highlights and Announcements

                                -    Stakeholder Announcement: Accepting Applications for Rural Placemaking 
                                -    A Life-Changing Connection 

### Featured Programs

                          -  Value-Added Producer Grants 
                          -  Rural Energy for America Program Renewable Energy Systems & Energy Efficiency Improvement Guaranteed Loans & Grants 
                          -  Water & Waste Disposal Loan & Grant Program 
                          -  Community Facilities Direct Loan & Grant Program 
                          -  Community Facilities Guaranteed Loan Program 
                          -  Single Family Housing Direct Home Loans 
View All State Programs

### Resources

**Check Eligibility**Check a home, town or service location to verify eligibility for Rural Programs

**Manage your USDA Loan**You can create an account and manage your current loan through the Customer Service Center (CSC) portal. You can also contact the CSC at 800-414-1226
View All Resources

## Rural Development News

                                -  Biden Administration Invests $12 Million with Indian Electric CooperativeApr 08, 2024 
                                -  Biden-Harris Administration Invests in Clean Energy for Oklahoma as Part of Investing in America AgendaMar 28, 2024 
                                -  Biden Administration Expanding High-Speed Internet in Rural AmericaMar 27, 2024 
                                -  Biden Administration Provides $11.9 Million for Clean Drinking Water in Southeast OklahomaMar 26, 2024 
                                -  Biden Administration Partnering with Choctaw Nation to Bring High-Speed Internet to Le Flore CountyMar 12, 2024 
                                -  Rural Development Announces Completion of Ringling Family Care ClinicMar 08, 2024 

View All State News
# C_2010179EN.01002101.xml

| 3.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/21

---

Appeal brought on 26 April 2010 by Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) delivered on 9 February 2010 in Case T-340/07: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE v European Commission

(Case C-200/10 P)

(2010/C 179/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Evropaïki Dynamiki — Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE (represented by: N. Korogiannakis, Δικηγόρος)

Other party: European Commission

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | Set aside the decision of the General Court, to order the Commission to make good the damage suffered by the Appellant as a result of its failure to comply with contractual obligations in the context of the performance of the EDC-53007 EEBO/27873 contract relating to the project entitled ‘e-Content Exposure and business Opportunities’ and to order the Commission to pay the Applicant's legal and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with the initial procedure, even if the current Appeal is rejected as well as those of the current Appeal, in case it is accepted. |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside the decision of the General Court, to order the Commission to make good the damage suffered by the Appellant as a result of its failure to comply with contractual obligations in the context of the performance of the EDC-53007 EEBO/27873 contract relating to the project entitled ‘e-Content Exposure and business Opportunities’ and to order the Commission to pay the Applicant's legal and other costs and expenses incurred in connection with the initial procedure, even if the current Appeal is rejected as well as those of the current Appeal, in case it is accepted.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Appellant submits that the General Court did not give a sufficiently clear statement of reasons for rejecting the a series of arguments put forward by the Appellant.

The Appellant submits the General Court committed an error in law in adopting a wrong interpretation of the wording of article 7 (6) of the contract which refers to the obligation of the contractors to take appropriate action to cancel or reduce their commitments upon receipt of the letter from the Commission notifying them of the termination of the contract.

---
# USDA Assists The Thompson Family of The Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe

Copied to clipboard

06.21.2022

Nestled along the beautiful Raquette River which flows along the St. Regis Mohawk Territory and Canada, you’ll find the home of the Thompson family. Inside and out of those newly constructed walls, you will see and hear the laughter and bustling activity of a young and growing family. Most precious and preserved, you will hear this family speaking in their native Mohawk language.

USDA Rural Development’s (RD) newest homeowner, Mrs. Tsionatiio Thompson, is an educator at the Akwesasne Freedom School, where she teaches children in this close knit community to also speak in their native Iroquoian tongue. A visit to this newest homeowner in Akwesasne gives you a sense of her family's proud Mohawk history and future in the making.

It was important for Tsionatiio and Travis Thompson to have a home that could accommodate them and their children. Before constructing this house, the Thompson’s were living in an older model single-wide manufactured home. With the added space of this 1,545 square foot house, which includes a full basement, each of their children Tehanonsakahnion (10 years old), Tehawennahkwa (8 years old), Tehorahkoion (4 years old) and daughter Tsiokwason (2 years old) have a bedroom and play space. Equally important to the Thompson children, they had space to add a rambunctious puppy named Bucky to the family.

“Through RD’s 502 Direct program I can say that this is a home we can afford; a place where we are able to have family and friends visit, as well as a place we can call home,” Mrs. Thompson said. Family includes Tsionatiio’s older brother, Taylor, who was the first member of the St. Regis Mohawk Community to construct and finance a home eight years ago on the reservation with Section 502 Direct Loan assistance. Since that time, in partnership with the Akwesasne Housing Authority, RD has financed 20 homes on St. Regis Mohawk tribal lands; a financing investment of over $3.3 million dollars.

“This is another tremendous example of the USDA working collaboratively with our First Nation partners of the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe,” said USDA Rural Development New York State Director Brian Murray. “We have been working with the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe for well over a decade, bringing all USDA program assistance to the people of this community so they can further grow and proposer with the support of grants, technical assistance and affordable financing.”

Obligation Amount: 

Year(s) of Obligation: 
2022

Congressional District: 

## Related Story

Browse All Stories →

### Lifetime Renter Achieves Homeownership

[Read More]

08.06.2019

HomeownershipHousing
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC

Mansfield Heliflight, Inc. Complainant


### v. City ofBurlington, Vermont Respondent FAA Docket No. 16-14-06

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME
This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based onthe abovereferenced complaint, filed in accordance withFAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted AirportEnforcementProceedings, 14 CFR, Part 16, subpart B. The Complainantunopposed motion for an extension oftime, filed on October 3, 2014, is hereby GRANTED and the reply and answer are due on orbefore November 24,2014. An extension oftime is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination inthis case. 

# I{

**dovP\~~** 

# t#If DateCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on November 19, 2014, I caused to be placed in the United States mail (first class mail, postage paid) a true copy ofthe FAA's Request for Additional Information and Notice ofExtension ofTime, addressed to: FOR RESPONDENT Pablo 0. Nuesch Anjali G. Patel Spiegel and McDiarmid, LLP 1875 Eye Street, N.W. Suite 700 Washington, DC 20006
FOR COMPLAINANT Benjamin H. Klein The Klein LawFirm, LLC 61 Broadway, Suite 2125 NewYork, NY 10006 Copy to: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket FAA Airport Compliance and Management Analysis, AC0-100

. 

# ]

**(!;;l1Ak~:'lift0~~)**

Claudia Roberts Office ofAirport Compliance
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 99.2



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
            SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as
chief financial officer of Iron Age Corporation (the "Company"), does hereby
certify that to the undersigned's knowledge:

         3)   the Company's 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of
              Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         4)   the information contained in the Company's 10-Q fairly presents,
              in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
              operations of the Company.


                                       /s/ Bart R. Huchel
                                       ------------------
                                       Bart R. Huchel
                                       Chief Financial Officer,
                                       Vice President - Finance and Treasurer



Dated: December 10, 2002
§ 25.7 Litigation management. ( a ) Liability for all claims against a Seller arising out of, relating to, or resulting from an Act of Terrorism when such Seller's Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology has been deployed in defense against, response to, or recovery from such act and such claims result or may result in loss to the Seller shall not be in an amount greater than the limits of liability insurance coverage required to be maintained by the Seller under this section or as specified in the applicable Designation.
( b ) In addition, in any action for damages brought under section 442 of Title 6, United States Code: ( 1 ) No punitive damages intended to punish or deter, exemplary damages, or other damages not intended to compensate a plaintiff for actual losses may be awarded, nor shall any party be liable for interest prior to the judgment;
( 2 ) Noneconomic damages may be awarded against a defendant only in an amount directly proportional to the percentage of responsibility of such defendant for the harm to the plaintiff, and no plaintiff may recover noneconomic damages unless the plaintiff suffered physical harm; and
( 3 ) Any recovery by a plaintiff shall be reduced by the amount of collateral source compensation, if any, that the plaintiff has received or is entitled to receive as a result of such Acts of Terrorism that result or may result in loss to the Seller.
( c ) Without prejudice to the authority of the Under Secretary to terminate a Designation pursuant to paragraph (h) of § 25.6, the liability limitations and reductions set forth in this section shall apply in perpetuity to all sales or deployments of a Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology in defense against, response to, or recovery from any Act of Terrorism that occurs on or after the effective date of the Designation applicable to such Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology, regardless of whether any liability insurance coverage required to be obtained by the Seller is actually obtained or maintained or not, provided that the sale of such Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology was consummated by the Seller on or after the earliest date of sale of such Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology specified in such Designation and prior to the earlier of the expiration or termination of such Designation.
( d ) There shall exist only one cause of action for loss of property, personal injury, or death for performance or non-performance of the Seller's Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology in relation to an Act of Terrorism. Such cause of action may be brought only against the Seller of the Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technology and may not be brought against the buyers, the buyers' contractors, or downstream users of the Technology, the Seller's suppliers or contractors, or any other person or entity. In addition, such cause of action must be brought in the appropriate district court of the United States.