alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010209EN.01002202.xml

| 31.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/22

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de Cassation (Luxembourg) lodged on 12 May 2010 — Sophie Jeanjean v Landsbanki Luxembourg SA (in liquidation)

(Case C-236/10)

()

2010/C 209/29

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour de Cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Sophie Jeanjean

Applicant:

Defendant: Landsbanki Luxembourg SA (in liquidation)

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Are Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (1) to be interpreted as applying to a termination of activities as a result of a declaration that the employer is insolvent or a judicial decision ordering the dissolution and winding-up, on grounds of insolvency, of the credit institution which is the employer on the basis of Article 61(l)(a) and (b) of the amended Law of 5 April 1993 relating to the financial sector, in respect of which termination the national legislation provides for the termination of employment contracts with immediate effect? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (1) to be interpreted as applying to a termination of activities as a result of a declaration that the employer is insolvent or a judicial decision ordering the dissolution and winding-up, on grounds of insolvency, of the credit institution which is the employer on the basis of Article 61(l)(a) and (b) of the amended Law of 5 April 1993 relating to the financial sector, in respect of which termination the national legislation provides for the termination of employment contracts with immediate effect?

1

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, are Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Directive 98/59/EC to be interpreted as meaning that the administrator or liquidator is to be deemed to be in the same position as an employer who is contemplating collective redundancies and who is capable of carrying out, to that end, the acts referred to in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 98/53/EC and of effecting such redundancies (judgment in Case C-323/08, paragraphs 39, 40 and 41)? (2) |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, are Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Directive 98/59/EC to be interpreted as meaning that the administrator or liquidator is to be deemed to be in the same position as an employer who is contemplating collective redundancies and who is capable of carrying out, to that end, the acts referred to in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 98/53/EC and of effecting such redundancies (judgment in Case C-323/08, paragraphs 39, 40 and 41)? (2)

2

---

(1)  OJ 1998 L 225, p. 16.

1

(2)  Judgment of 10 December 2009 in Case C-323/08 Rodríguez Mayor and Others

2

Rodríguez Mayor and Others

---
#### § 93.324 Detention for quarantine.

Horses intended for importation from Mexico shall be quarantined until they qualify for release from such quarantine, either at an APHIS facility designated in § 93.303 (a) or at a facility in Mexico. In order to qualify for such release, all horses while so detained shall test negative to an official test for dourine, glanders, equine piroplasmosis, equine infectious anemia,[1] and such other tests that may be required by the Administrator to determine their freedom from other communicable diseases. Such horses shall also be subjected to such other inspections and disinfections deemed necessary by the Administrator, and they shall be released from quarantine only if found to be free from any communicable disease upon inspection.

[55 FR 31495, Aug. 2, 1990, as amended at 56 FR 15489, Apr. 17, 1991; 58 FR 45238, Aug. 27, 1993; 59 FR 67614, Dec. 30, 1994; 60 FR 5128, Jan. 26, 1995; 61 FR 39853, July 31, 1996; 61 FR 52246, Oct. 7, 1996. Redesignated at 62 FR 56012, 56017, Oct. 28, 1997, as amended at 63 FR 3640, Jan. 26, 1998; 86 FR 45624, Aug. 16, 2021; 88 FR 63004, Sept. 14, 2023]

###### Footnotes -
  93.324

[1] Protocols for testing equines in import quarantine are available on the APHIS website at *www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/importexport/animal-import-and-export/equine/guidelines-docs-related-to-importing-equine.*
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 12 (Thursday, January 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2714-2715]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-950]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

National Petroleum Council

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Renewal.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 14(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act and (Pub. L. 92-463),

[[Page 2715]]

and in accordance with Title 41, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 
102.365(a), and following consultation with the Committee Management 
Secretariat, General Services Administration, notice is hereby given 
that the National Petroleum Council has been renewed for a two-year 
period, beginning January 12, 2012. The Council will provide advice and 
recommendations to the Secretary of Energy on matters relating to oil 
and natural gas, and the oil and natural gas industries.
    Additionally, the renewal of the Council has been determined to be 
essential to the conduct of the Department's business and to be in the 
public interest in connection with the performance of duties imposed 
upon the Department of Energy by law and agreement. The Council will 
continue to operate in accordance with the provisions of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act and the rules and regulations in implementation 
of that Act.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Nancy Johnson at (202) 586-6458.

    Issued at Washington, DC, on January 12, 2012.
Carol A. Matthews,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-950 Filed 1-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
# C_2012287EN.01001302.xml

| 22.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 July 2012 — Compañía Española de Tabaco en Rama, SA (Cetarsa) v European Commission

(Case C-181/11 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Competition - Agreements - Spanish market for the purchase and first processing of raw tobacco - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Price fixing and market sharing - Fines - Equal treatment - Maximum limit of 10 % of turnover - Cooperation - Distortion of evidence - Manifest error of assessment - Failure to state reasons)

2012/C 287/22

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Compañía Española de Tabaco en Rama, SA (Cetarsa) (represented by: M. Araujo Boyd, J. Buendía Sierra and Á. Givaja Sanz, abogados)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, E. Gippini Fournier and L. Malferrari, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) in Case T-33/05 Cetarsa v Commission, by which that Court dismissed an application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2004) final of 20 October 2004, relating to a proceeding under Article 81(1) EC (Case COMP/C.38.238/B.2 — Raw Tobacco — Spain), and a cross-appeal by the Commission seeking to have the amount of the fine imposed on the applicant increased

Cetarsa

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal and the cross-appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal and the cross-appeal;

| 2. | Orders Compañía Española de Tabaco en Rama, SA (Cetarsa) to pay the costs of the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Compañía Española de Tabaco en Rama, SA (Cetarsa) to pay the costs of the appeal;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs of the cross-appeal. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs of the cross-appeal.

---

(1)  OJ C 186, 25.6.2011.

1

---
From: Lydia Wegman/RTP/USEPA/US

To: nfrey@omb.eop.gov

Cc: Beth Hassett-Sipple/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Joseph-J Dougherty/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 06/12/2012 05:53 PM

Subject: I realized that I have already sent you the revisions to the implementation section, so with the 

monitoring revisions I just sent you, we have provided edits to address all the issues I discussed 

with you this morning and that we discussed with the interagency group last week.
### §3704. Grades and ratings; military authority

The grades and ratings in the Reserve, including cadets but not grades above rear admiral, are those prescribed by law or regulation for the Coast Guard. A member of the Reserve on active duty or inactive-duty training has the same authority, rights, and privileges in the performance of that duty as a member of the Regular Coast Guard of corresponding grade or rating.

(Added Pub. L. 96–322, §1, Aug. 4, 1980, 94 Stat. 1003, §704; renumbered §3704, Pub. L. 115–282, title I, §118(b), Dec. 4, 2018, 132 Stat. 4233.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 754 of this title prior to the complete revision of former chapter 21 of this title by Pub. L. 96–322.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–282 renumbered section 704 of this title as this section.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 48 (Friday, March 11, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 13404]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5730]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the ``Government in the Sunshine 
Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation's Board of Directors will meet in open session at 
10 a.m. on Tuesday, March 15, 2011, to consider the following matters:
    Summary Agenda: No substantive discussion of the following items is 
anticipated. These matters will be resolved with a single vote unless a 
member of the Board of Directors requests that an item be moved to the 
discussion agenda.
Disposition of minutes of previous Board of Directors' Meetings.
Summary reports, status reports, and reports of actions taken pursuant 
to authority delegated by the Board of Directors.
Memorandum and resolution re: Final Rule Making Technical Amendments to 
FDIC's Anti-Money-Laundering Program and Fair Credit Reporting Rules to 
Update Cross-References to Treasury Regulations.
Memorandum and resolution re: Authorization to Publish Privacy Act 
System of Records Notice in the Federal Register.

Discussion Agenda

Memorandum and resolution re: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding 
Priorities and Claims Process under the Orderly Liquidation Authority 
Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection 
Act.
    The meeting will be held in the Board Room on the sixth floor of 
the FDIC Building located at 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC.
    This Board meeting will be Webcast live via the Internet and 
subsequently made available on-demand approximately one week after the 
event. Visit http://www.vodium.com/goto/fdic/boardmeetings.asp to view 
the event. If you need any technical assistance, please visit our Video 
Help page at: http://www.fdic.gov/video.html.
    The FDIC will provide attendees with auxiliary aids (e.g., sign 
language interpretation) required for this meeting. Those attendees 
needing such assistance should call 703-562-2404 (Voice) or 703-649-
4354 (Video Phone) to make necessary arrangements.
    Requests for further information concerning the meeting may be 
directed to Mr. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary of the 
Corporation, at 202-898-7043.

    Dated: March 8, 2011.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2011-5730 Filed 3-9-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P
#### § 381.216 Procedure for judicial seizure, condemnation, and disposition.

Any poultry or other article subject to seizure and condemnation under this subpart is liable to be proceeded against and seized and condemned, and disposed of, at any time, on an appropriate pleading in any U.S. district court, or other proper court specified in section 21 of the Act, within the jurisdiction of which the article is found.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 508 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 508

To extend the authorization for the Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory 
                              Commission.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 14, 2019

Mr. Markey (for himself and Ms. Warren) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the authorization for the Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory 
                              Commission.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Cape Cod National Seashore Advisory 
Commission Reauthorization Act''.

SEC. 2. CAPE COD NATIONAL SEASHORE ADVISORY COMMISSION.

    Effective September 26, 2018, section 8(a) of Public Law 87-126 (16 
U.S.C. 459b-7(a)) is amended in the second sentence by striking 
``2018'' and inserting ``2029''.
                                 <all>
```
### §290a. Definitions

For the purposes of this chapter:

#### (1) Standard reference data

The term "standard reference data" means data that is—

(A) either—

(i) quantitative information related to a measurable physical, or chemical, or biological property of a substance or system of substances of known composition and structure;

(ii) measurable characteristics of a physical artifact or artifacts;

(iii) engineering properties or performance characteristics of a system; or

(iv) 1 or more digital data objects that serve—

(I) to calibrate or characterize the performance of a detection or measurement system; or

(II) to interpolate or extrapolate, or both, data described in subparagraph (A) through (C); 1 and

(B) that is critically evaluated as to its reliability under section 290b of this title.

#### (2) Secretary

The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Commerce.

(Pub. L. 90–396, §2, July 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 340; Pub. L. 114–329, title I, §108, Jan. 6, 2017, 130 Stat. 2987.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2017—Pub. L. 114–329 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "For the purposes of this chapter—

"(a) The term 'standard reference data' means quantitative information, related to a measurable physical or chemical property of a substance or system of substances of known composition and structure, which is critically evaluated as to its reliability under section 290b of this title.

"(b) The term 'Secretary' means the Secretary of Commerce."

1 So in original.
Exhibit 10.64  FIRST AMENDMENT TO LEASE  THIS FIRST
AMENDMENT TO LEASE (this Amendment)
is entered into as of Sept 30, 2003 (the Effective Date) by and between SOBRATO
INTERESTS, a California limited partnership (Landlord) and AFFYMETRIX, a Delaware corporation
(Tenant)
in the following factual context:  A.            Landlord and Tenant entered into
that certain Lease dated as of July 3, 2002 (the Lease) covering the premises commonly
known as 3420 Central Expressway, Santa Clara, California, as more particularly
described in the Lease (the Premises). Capitalized terms used herein and not
defined herein shall have the meanings given them in the Lease.  B.            Tenant is entering
into a sublease agreement with Covad Communications Company, the current Tenant
of the Premises, pursuant to which Tenant will occupy the Premises commencing
on November 1, 2003 for the purpose of preparing the Premises for its
occupancy.  C.            Provided the
sublease agreement referenced in Paragraph B is fully executed by all
applicable parties, Landlord and Tenant amend the Lease to modify the purpose
of the Early Access Period as provided in this Amendment.  NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereby agree as follows:  1.             Tenant.The name of the Tenant, as defined in Section 1 of the Lease, shall be
amended as follows: Affymetrix, Inc., a Delaware corporation.  2.             Term.
The third paragraph of Section 4 of the Lease shall be deleted in its entirety
and replaced with the following:  Tenant shall be allowed early access to the Premises during the period
commencing on April 1, 2004 and continuing until the Commencement Date (Early
Access Period) to use the Premises in accordance with Section 3 hereof. Tenant
shall be subject to all the terms and conditions of the Lease during the Early
Access Period except that no Base Monthly Rent or other expenses or amounts
shall be due or payable (excluding utility charges incurred by Tenant).  3.             Effect
of Amendment. As modified by this Amendment, all of the terms and
conditions of the Lease remain unchanged and in full force and effect. In the
event of any express conflict or inconsistency between the terms of this
Amendment and the terms of the Lease, the terms of this Amendment shall control
and govern.  4.             Counterparts.
This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which
shall be an original, but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute
one and the same instrument.  1 
   IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Landlord and Tenant have executed this Amendment as
of the day and year first above written.  LANDLORD:
  TENANT:SOBRATO INTERESTS,
  AFFYMETRIX, INC., a Delawarea California limited partnership
  corporationBy:
  /s/ John M. Sobrato
  
  By:
  /s/ Greg SchiffmanName:
  JOHN M. SOBRATO
  
  Name:
  GREG SCHIFFMANTitle:
  GENERAL PARTNER
  
  Title:
  SVP CFODate:
  SEPT 29, 03
  
  Date:
  8-28-03   2
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION – NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]



# United States Court of Appeals

**For the First Circuit**

No. 01-1640 DEBORAH SCOTT, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v. SULZER CARBOMEDICS, INC., MARK HAMLET, AND ROBERT WHITE, Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. Nancy Gertner, U.S. District Judge ]
Before Boudin, Chief Judge , Rosenn*, Senior Circuit Judge , and Lipez, Circuit Judge . Matthew Cobb , withwhom LawOffice of Matthew Cobbwas on brief, for appellant. Lisa J. Damon , with whom Brigitte M. Duffyand SeyfarthShaw were on brief, for appellees. January 3, 2002

_______________* Of the Third Circuit, sitting by designation.-3- Per Curiam . Deborah Scott appeals from the judgment of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of her former employer, Sulzer Carbomedics, Inc. Scott claims that Sulzer Carbomedics, which terminated her employment in June of 1997, discriminated against her on the basis of her gender in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e; the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d); and the Massachusetts anti-discrimination statute, Mass Gen. Laws ch. 151B. She also seeks to recover against two of her supervisors at Sulzer Carbomedics for intentional interference with contractual relations, and against all defendants for libel and slander. On May 15, 2001, the district court issued a Memorandumand Order granting summary judgment for the defen dants on all counts. Scott v. Sulzer Carbomedics, Inc. , 141 F. Supp. 2d 154 (D. Mass 2001).

After a detailed review of the evidence, the district court found that Scott had failed to meet "her initial burden of presenti ng circumstantial evidence sufficient to create an inference that the basis for [the] adverse employment decisions" was her gender. Id. at 173. The district court concluded that "[t]he story that emerges from the documents is not one of discrimination, but one of performance," id. at 161, and that Scott had "failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as-4-

to whether she performed her job at an acceptable level," id. at 172. The district court also found Scott's tort claims to be without merit. Id. at 177-80.

We have said that "when a trial court accurately takes the measure of a case and articulates its rationale clearly and convincingly, 'an appellate court should refrain from writing at lengthto no other end than to hear its own words resonate.'" Cruz-Ramos v. Puerto Rico Sun Oil Co. , 202 F.3d 381, 383 (1st Cir. 2000) (quoting Lawton v. State Mut. Life Assurance Co. , 101 F.3d 218, 220 (1st Cir. 1996)). This is such a case. We therefore affirm the judgment below for substantially the
reasons given in the district court's comprehensive and wellreasoned opinion, upon which we cannot improve.

Affirmed.
### §1521a. Department of Commerce Nonrecurring Expenses Fund

(a) There is hereby established in the Treasury of the United States a fund to be known as the "Department of Commerce Nonrecurring Expenses Fund" (the Fund): Provided, That unobligated balances of expired discretionary funds appropriated for this or any succeeding fiscal year from the General Fund of the Treasury to the Department of Commerce by this or any other Act may be transferred (not later than the end of the fifth fiscal year after the last fiscal year for which such funds are available for the purposes for which appropriated) into the Fund: Provided further, That amounts deposited in the Fund shall be available until expended, and in addition to such other funds as may be available for such purposes, for information and business technology system modernization and facilities infrastructure improvements necessary for the operation of the Department, subject to approval by the Office of Management and Budget: Provided further, That amounts in the Fund may be obligated only after the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate are notified at least 15 days in advance of the planned use of funds.

(b) In addition to amounts otherwise made available by this Act, there is appropriated $20,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2022, to the Fund for necessary expenses for a business application system modernization.

(Pub. L. 116–93, div. B, title I, §111, Dec. 20, 2019, 133 Stat. 2395.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in text, is div. B of Pub. L. 116–93, Dec. 20, 2019, 133 Stat. 2385, known as the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2020. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.