alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010234EN.01002802.xml

| 28.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 234/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/28

---

Action brought on 7 July 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Finland

(Case C-342/10)

()

2010/C 234/46

Language of the case: Finnish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by I. Koskinen and R. Lyal)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Finland

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by introducing and maintaining in force a scheme under which dividends paid to foreign pension funds are taxed in a discriminatory manner, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 TFEU and Article 40 of the EEA Agreement; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by introducing and maintaining in force a scheme under which dividends paid to foreign pension funds are taxed in a discriminatory manner, the Republic of Finland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 63 TFEU and Article 40 of the EEA Agreement;

| — | order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Finland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Finland taxes foreign pension funds on the dividends received by them more heavily than Finnish pension funds. Finnish pension funds are taxed under a special tax scheme (Elinkeinoverolaki) and their tax rate is determined differently from that of other corporations. Under Paragraph 6a of the Elinkeinoverolaki, only 75 % of their dividend income is taxable income, and since the corporation tax rate is 26 % their real tax rate is 19,5 %. Finnish pension institutions can also deduct, under Paragraph 7 and point 10 of the first subparagraph of Paragraph 8 of the Elinkeinoverolaki, expenses and losses deriving from the acquisition or preservation of income, and also pension liabilities. Dividends received by comparable foreign pension funds are charged withholding tax at a tax rate of as much as 28 %. As regards pension funds established in the Member States and most pension funds from EFTA countries belonging to the EEA, the dividends are taxed in accordance with a tax rate of 19,5 %, but foreign pension funds are not entitled to make the corresponding deductions.

The tax rate applicable to dividends paid to recipients abroad under the Finnish tax scheme, together with the broader basis of assessment applicable to them, acts to the disadvantage of foreign pension funds offering their services to Finnish customers by placing them in an unfavourable competitive situation. The discriminatory treatment of foreign pension funds makes it less profitable and attractive for those funds to invest in Finnish companies and affects the opportunities of Finnish companies to acquire capital finance from foreign pension funds. There is therefore a prohibited restriction for the purposes of Article 63 TFEU and Article 40 of the EEA Agreement. The discriminatory treatment of foreign pension funds cannot be justified on any of the grounds put forward by the Republic of Finland.

---
<TABLE>
                          CORGENIX MEDICAL CORPORATION
                       COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
<CAPTION>

                                                           Three Months Ended
                                                              September 30,
                                                           1998           1997
                                                           ----           ----
<S>                                                  <C>              <C>
Net loss...........................................  $   (327,424)    $  (314,532)
                                                       ============    ============

Common shares outstanding at beginning of period...    12,102,494       4,837,170

     Effect of shares issued during the period.....        54,097          54,480
                                                       ------------    ------------

Basic and diluted weighted average common shares...    12,156,591       4,891,650

     Basic and diluted loss per share................$    (0.03)      $   (0.06)

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

LINDA SMITH

,

APPELLANT,

V.

JOHN BURT

, §

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 4

- 00 317

- CV

Appeal from the

388th District C ourt

of El Paso County, Texas

APPELLEE.

§ (TC# 89

- 11455 )

MEMO RANDUM OPINION

This appeal is before the Court to determine whether it should be dismissed for want of

prosecution. Finding that the Appellant’s brief has not been filed, we dismiss the appeal for want

of prosecution.

Appellant’s brief was due to be filed on March 25, 2015 but none was filed. O n April 1,

2015 , the Clerk notified Appellant that her brief was past due and no motion for extension of

time had been filed. The letter advised Appellant that the Court intended to dismiss the appeal

for want of prosecution unless Appellant responded within ten days and showed grounds for

continuing the appeal. See T EX .R.A PP .P. 38.8(a)(1). Neither the brief nor a motion for exten sion

of time in which to file the brief has been filed. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of

prosecution.

April 2 2 , 2015

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hugh es, JJ.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                                  SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
          NAME                                    JURISDICTION OF ORGANIZATION
          ----                                    ----------------------------
<S>                                               <C>
TBA Entertainment Group Nashville, Inc.           Tennessee
(formerly known as Avalon Entertainment
Group, Inc.)

AWC Acquisition Group                             Delaware

TBA Entertainment Holding Corporation             Delaware

Eric Chandler Merchandising, Inc.                 California

TBA Entertainment Group Chicago, Inc.             Delaware
(formerly known as Corporate Productions,
Inc.)

Corporate Incentives, Inc.                        Illinois

TBA Entertainment Group Dallas, Inc.              Texas
(formerly known as Magnum
Communications, Inc.)

TBA Entertainment Group Phoenix, Inc.             Arizona
(formerly known as Image Entertainment
Productions, Inc.)

Karin Glass & Associates, Inc.                    Indiana

Ink Up, Inc.                                      Indiana

KGA, Inc.                                         Indiana

Titley Spalding & Associates LLC                  Tennessee

TKS Marketing, Inc.                               Tennessee

TBA Resort Holding Corporation                    Delaware

TBA/Frank Joint Venture                           Not applicable

Warner/TBA Joint Venture                          Not applicable

</TABLE>
§ 95.9 Derivatives of tallow derived from bovines. ( a ) The importation of derivatives of tallow from bovines is prohibited unless the commodity meets the conditions of either paragraph (b), (c), (d), or (e) of this section as well as paragraph (f) of this section, or, alternatively, meets the conditions of paragraph (g) of this section.
( b ) The commodity meets the definition of tallow derivative in § 95.1.
( c ) The derivative is from tallow composed of a maximum level of insoluble impurities of 0.15 percent in weight.
( d ) The derivative is from tallow that originates from a region of negligible risk for BSE.
( e ) The derivative is from tallow that originates from a region of controlled risk for BSE, is derived from bovines that have passed ante-mortem and post-mortem inspections, and does not contain SRMs as defined for regions of controlled risk for BSE in § 92.1 of this subchapter.
( f ) The tallow derivative is accompanied to the United States by an original certificate signed by a full-time salaried veterinary officer of the national government of the exporting region, or issued by a veterinarian designated by the national government of the exporting region and endorsed by a full-time salaried veterinary officer of the national government of the exporting region, representing that the veterinarian issuing the certificate was authorized to do so. The certificate must state that the requirements of paragraph (b), (c), (d), or (e) of this section, as applicable, have been met and, for tallow derivatives other than those described in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, must indicate the BSE risk classification of the exporting region.
( g ) The Administrator determines that the tallow derivative will not come into contact with ruminants in the United States and can be imported under conditions that will prevent the introduction of BSE into the United States, and the person importing the tallow derivative has obtained a United States Veterinary Permit for Importation and Transportation of Controlled Materials and Organisms and Vectors. To apply for a permit, file a permit application on VS Form 16-3, which is available from Strategy and Policy, Veterinary Services, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231, or electronically at *https://efile.aphis.usda.gov/s/vs-permitting-assistant .* The application for such a permit must state the intended use of the tallow derivative and the name and address of the consignee in the United States.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0393) [78 FR 73003, Dec. 4, 2013, as amended at 86 FR 45628, Aug. 16, 2021]
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1295

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 27, 2000

Referred to the Committee on Government Reform

AN ACT

To designate the United States Post Office located at 3813

Main Street in East Chicago, Indiana, as the ‘‘Lance

Corporal Harold Gomez Post Office’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 1295 RFH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF LANCE CORPORAL HAROLD

2 GOMEZ POST OFFICE.

3 The United States Post Office located at 3813 Main

4 Street in East Chicago, Indiana, shall be known and des5 ignated as the ‘‘Lance Corporal Harold Gomez Post Of6 fice’’.

7 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

8 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

9 paper, or other record of the United States to the post

10 office referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a ref11 erence to the ‘‘Lance Corporal Harold Gomez Post

12 Office’’.

Passed the Senate November 19, 1999.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE: January 7, 2015 TO: Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket id: OAR
-2013
-0602 FROM: Region 5, EPA SUBJECT: Regiona l Administrator Susan Hedman’s Speaking E ngagements on the Topic of

Clean Power Plan
**SUMMARY** The following is a list of Regional Administrator Susan Hedman’s speaking engagements on the topic of Clean Power Plan. **Date Audience**  **# of Attendees** 6/10/2014 Gas power Chicago conference 150 6/17/2014 Power experts Conference 150 9/9/2014 Women in Energy 100 9/17/2014 BlueGreen Alliance 50 9/18/2014 Illinois Chamber of Commerce 50 9/23/2014 Rotary Club of Chicago 50 9/26/2014 University of MN 30 9/29/2014 University of MI 30 10/1/2014 University of Chicago 30 10/3/2014 Wisconsin Business Alliance 50 10/3/2014 University of Wisconsin 30 10/10/2014 Ohio State University 30 10/16/2014 Calumet Area Industrial Commission 50 10/30/2014 Federation of Environmental Technologists 300
- English
                  - Spanish

## What is the Higher Blends Infrastructure Incentive Program?

The purpose of the HBIIP is to increase significantly the sales and use of higher blends of ethanol and biodiesel by expanding the infrastructure for renewable fuels derived from U.S. agricultural products. The program is also intended to encourage a more comprehensive approach to market higher blends by sharing the costs related to building out biofuel-related infrastructure.
How to ApplyNOFOPress ReleaseSubscribe to UpdatesFactsheetHoja Informativa del Programa
Contact HBIIP@usda.gov for more information.

## Program Benefits

Biofuels, which contribute to energy security, reduce air pollution, and support rural economic development, are an important market for the U.S.

Approximately 96 percent of the vehicles on the road today, roughly 290 million, are legally approved to use E15. E15 is fully approved for use in cars, SUVs, pickups, vans, or other light duty vehicles manufactured after the year 2000. In addition, there are more than 22 million flex fuel vehicles (FFVs) on the road in the United States, roughly 8 percent of all vehicles, that can use ethanol blends up to E85. All diesel vehicles can operate on B20.

The expansion of biofuel infrastructure, as facilitated by HBIIP, broadens the availability of renewable fuels like E15, E85, and B20, and helps American families save money at the pump while reducing carbon emissions and harmful tailpipe pollution. Expanded use of higher blends of biofuels also boosts the availability of skilled jobs with good wages in rural communities and bolsters the employment of U.S. military veterans.

Renewable Fuels Association

## Program Benefits

Biofuels, which contribute to energy security, reduce air pollution, and support rural economic development, are an important market for the U.S.

Approximately 96 percent of the vehicles on the road today, roughly 290 million, are legally approved to use E15. E15 is fully approved for use in cars, SUVs, pickups, vans, or other light duty vehicles manufactured after the year 2000. In addition, there are more than 22 million flex fuel vehicles (FFVs) on the road in the United States, roughly 8 percent of all vehicles, that can use ethanol blends up to E85. All diesel vehicles can operate on B20.

The expansion of biofuel infrastructure, as facilitated by HBIIP, broadens the availability of renewable fuels like E15, E85, and B20, and helps American families save money at the pump while reducing carbon emissions and harmful tailpipe pollution. Expanded use of higher blends of biofuels also boosts the availability of skilled jobs with good wages in rural communities and bolsters the employment of U.S. military veterans.
#### § 95.28 Glands, organs, ox gall, and like materials; requirements for unrestricted entry.

Glands, organs, ox gall or bile, bone marrow, and various like materials derived from domestic ruminants or swine, intended for use in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products shall not be imported except subject to handling and treatment in accordance with § 95.29, unless such glands, organs, or materials originated in and were shipped directly from a region not declared by the Secretary of Agriculture to be infected with foot-and-mouth disease.

[28 FR 5981, June 13, 1963, as amended at 62 FR 56024, Oct. 28, 1997. Redesignated and amended at 78 FR 73003, 73007, Dec. 4, 2013; 83 FR 15494, Apr. 11, 2018]
# C_2007117EN.01000302.xml

| 26.5.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.5.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/3

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arbeitsgericht Bonn (Germany) lodged on 20 February 2007 — Dr Andrea Raccanelli v Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften e.V.

(Case C-94/07)

(2007/C 117/04)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Arbeitsgericht Bonn

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dr Andrea Raccanelli

Applicant:

Defendant: Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften e.V.

Defendant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Should the applicant be regarded as a worker within the meaning of the European concept of ‘worker ’if he is not called upon to provide any more work-related services than are doctoral students with an employment contract concluded pursuant to the Bundesangestelltentarifvertrag (federal collective agreement for public sector workers, ‘BAT/2’)? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Should the applicant be regarded as a worker within the meaning of the European concept of ‘worker ’if he is not called upon to provide any more work-related services than are doctoral students with an employment contract concluded pursuant to the Bundesangestelltentarifvertrag (federal collective agreement for public sector workers, ‘BAT/2’)?

| 2. | In the event that the answer to Question 1 is in the negative: must Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (1) be interpreted as meaning that there is no discrimination only if the applicant was at least granted the right to choose between an employment contract and a grant before his period of doctoral study with the defendant began? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the event that the answer to Question 1 is in the negative: must Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community (1) be interpreted as meaning that there is no discrimination only if the applicant was at least granted the right to choose between an employment contract and a grant before his period of doctoral study with the defendant began?

1

| 3. | In the event that the answer to Question 2 is that the applicant should have been granted the opportunity to conclude an employment contract, the question must be asked:
  What are the consequences in law in the event of discrimination against foreign nationals? |
| --- | --- |

3.

In the event that the answer to Question 2 is that the applicant should have been granted the opportunity to conclude an employment contract, the question must be asked:

What are the consequences in law in the event of discrimination against foreign nationals?

---

(1)  OJ English Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 475.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 13666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5657]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-74,326]


Pitney Bowes, Inc., Mailing Solutions Management, Global 
Engineering Group, Including On-Site Leased Workers From Guidant Group, 
and Teleworkers Located Throughout the United States Reporting to 
Shelton, CT; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility to Apply for 
Worker Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 
(``Act''), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a 
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance 
on September 10, 2010, applicable to workers and former workers of 
Pitney Bowes, Inc., Mailing Solutions Management Division, Engineering 
Quality Assurance, Shelton, Connecticut. The Department's Notice was 
published in the Federal Register on September 23, 2010 (75 FR 57981). 
The certification was amended on January 3, 2011 to include teleworkers 
located through the United States. The Department's Notice of amended 
certification was published in the Federal Register on January 14, 2011 
(76 FR 2710).
    At the request of a company official, the Department reviewed the 
certification to clarify the subject worker group's identity.
    Additional information revealed that the correct identity of the 
subject firm worker group should read: Pitney Bowes, Inc., Mailing 
Solutions Management, Global Engineering Group, including on-side 
leased workers from Guidant Group and teleworkers located through the 
United States reporting to, Shelton, Connecticut.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to 
properly reflect this matter.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-74,326 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Pitney Bowes, Inc., Mailing Solutions Management, 
Global Engineering Group, including on-site leased workers from 
Guidant Group and teleworkers located throughout the United States 
reporting to, Shelton, Connecticut, who became totally or partially 
separated from employment on or after June 23, 2009, through 
September 10, 2012, and all workers in the group threatened with 
total or partial separation from employment on the date of 
certification through two years from the date of certification, are 
eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title 
II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 22nd day of February 2011.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011-5657 Filed 3-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Pat Swanson

of

Iowa

Pat Swanson, a farm industry appointee, farms with her husband Don and his family in 

Ottumwa, Iowa as a partner of Swanson Farm Partnership, a soybean, corn, and cow-calf farming 

operation. Swanson has worked as a crop insurance agent since 2005 and co-owns Son Risk Management 

crop insurance agency. Swanson also serves as a State Committee Member on the Iowa Farm Service 

Agency, District 9 Director for the Iowa Soybean Association, American Soybean Association Advocacy 

Communications Team Member, and Wapello County 4-H Foundation Board Secretary. Pat has 15 years 

of experience with the crop insurance program.
#### Thomas St. John Baldwin, Respondent, v. Charles Wertheim, Appellant. (Actions Nos. 1 and 2.)

Judgments of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Woodward, Jenks, Gaynor, Rich and Miller, JJ., ¿oncurred.
From: Dorothy Carpenter

Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 9:46 AM

To: 'carl.nelson@aa.com'; 'rbkeiner@crowell.com'; 'hkamen@coair.com'; 'recohn@hhlaw.com'; 'prrizzi@hhlaw.com'; 'sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com'; 'msinick@ssd.com'; 'jyoung@yklaw.com'; 'dkirstein@yklaw.com'; 'rsilverberg@sgbdc.com'; 'Todd.Homan@dot.gov'; 'howar d.kass@usairways.com'; 'dan.weiss@coair.com'; 'jeff.morgan@delta.com'; 'jeffrey.manley@united.com'; 'benjamin.slocum@usairways.com'; 'jhill@dlalaw.com'; 'robert.land@jetblue.com'; 'susan.kurland@dot.gov'; 'efaberman@wileyrein.com'; 'kenneth.quinn@pillsbury law.com'

Cc: Bob Kneisley; Leslie Abbott Subject: Application of Southwest Airlines 9

- 30

- 10

Please see the attached document filed in Docket OST

- 2000

- 7182.

Thanks, Dorothy

Dorothy Carpenter

Southwest Airlines Co.

Governmental Affairs

1901 L Street NW

Su ite 640 Washington DC 20036 (202) 263

- 6282 office (972) 653

- 0851 cell

*** CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE ***

NOTICE: This e

- mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information intended solely for the u se of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received t his message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message from your system.



### ******* CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE *******

This e

- mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged

and confidential in formation intended solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message from your system. Thank you.