alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal L 266I/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 266I |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6313 August 2020 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 266I

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6313 August 2020

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1194 of 12 August 2020 implementing Article 17(1) of Regulation (EU) No 224/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in the Central African Republic | 1 |
| | | DECISIONS |
| | * | Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2020/1195 of 12 August 2020 implementing Decision 2013/798/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Central African Republic | 4 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1194 of 12 August 2020 implementing Article 17(1) of Regulation (EU) No 224/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in the Central African Republic

1

DECISIONS

*

Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2020/1195 of 12 August 2020 implementing Decision 2013/798/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against the Central African Republic

4

| | | Corrigenda |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Corrigendum to Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1188 of 6 August 2020 on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in the United Kingdom ( OJ L 265, 12.8.2020 ) | 7 |

Corrigenda

*

Corrigendum to Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/1188 of 6 August 2020 on the launch of automated data exchange with regard to dactyloscopic data in the United Kingdom ( OJ L 265, 12.8.2020 )

( OJ L 265, 12.8.2020 )

7

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

 TACOMA DIVISION

MICHELLE BEARDSHEAR, 

Plaintiff, CASE NO: 3:06-cv-5231-RBL

vs.

VANCOUVER HOTEL PARTNERS, 

LLC., a Washington limited liability company, and

WBM ENTERPRISES,LLC, a Washington

Limited liability company, d/b/a Quality Inn and 

Conference Center,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE

 TO AMEND THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Leave

to Amend the First Amended Complaint and Amend the Style of the Case, and the Court

having noted the pertinent portions of the record and being otherwise fully advised in the

premises, it is hereby

ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:

Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend the First Amended Complaint is GRANTED.

Plaintiff shall file the Second Amended Complaint upon receipt of this Order.

Defendants shall file a response to the Amended Complaint within 20 days from the date

Case 3:06-cv-05231-RBL Document 34 Filed 07/02/07 Page 1 of 2
of this Order, or from the date of service, as applicable. In addition, the style of this case

shall be amended to reflect the proper party Defendants as styled in the Second Amended

Complaint.

DATED this 2nd day of July, 2007. 

A

RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05231-RBL Document 34 Filed 07/02/07 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT (10)Q

                           DESCRIPTION OF ECOLAB INC.
                            MANAGEMENT INCENTIVE PLAN


The Ecolab Inc. Management Incentive Plan ("MIP") is not set forth in a formal
plan document. Set forth below is a description of the MIP as it applies to the
executive officers of Ecolab Inc. (the "Company").

The MIP is a cash-based annual incentive plan that focuses executives' attention
on achieving competitive annual business goals. The Compensation Committee of
the Company's Board of Directors (the "Committee"), with input from management,
sets specific performance goals at the beginning of each year and communicates
them to the Company's executives. The Committee also establishes annual
incentive targets which are expressed as a percentage of base salary. These
targets are set at a level which approximates the median annual incentive
targets expressed as a percentage of base salary of a comparator group
consisting of a broad range of United States manufacturing and service
companies. Achievement of performance goals will result in a median award, while
achievement of performance levels below or above the performance goal will
result in minimum, premium or maximum awards.

Executives with corporate-wide responsibility earn awards based primarily on the
achievement of Earnings Per Share ("EPS") goals. The Committee establishes
annual EPS levels that must be achieved to receive minimum, median and maximum
awards. Economic projections and historical compounded annual EPS growth
measured over three-year periods for the Standard & Poor's 500 Index, is the
basis for the EPS goals. In addition to the above, a portion of the incentive is
also earned based on the achievement of operating income goals for the Company.

Executives with business-unit responsibility earn MIP awards primarily by
meeting unit-specific operating income goals. Other financial or strategic
factors including, but not limited to, sales, cash flow and management of
assets, working capital and inventory, may also affect the size of the awards
provided that the operating income thresholds are met. The weight of each
performance measure varies among business units. Notwithstanding the above, the
performance measures for certain executives with business-unit responsibility
will also include achievement of EPS goals.

The Committee, in general, makes awards based strictly on level of achievement
against pre-established goals. However, under the MIP, the Committee may, in its
sole discretion, make awards at a level higher or lower than that determined by
strict application of achievement against goals based upon such other
performance criteria as the Committee determines appropriate.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the WESTERN DISTRICT of WASHINGTON

FRAZ AHMAD MUSTAQ,

 

 Plaintiff, 

 

 vs. 

ALBERTO R. GONZALEZ, et al.,

 Defendant.

 C06-248 RSL

 MINUTE ORDER

 REASSIGNING CASE

Pursuant to the Amended General Order entered by the Chief Judge on

November 3, 2004, this action has been reassigned to the Honorable Robert S. Lasnik, United

States District Judge. 

All future documents filed in this case must bear the cause number C06-248 RSL and bear

the Judge’s name in the upper right hand corner of the document.

Dated this 13th day of April, 2006

BRUCE RIFKIN

Clerk of Court

by: /s/ PETER H. VOELKER

 Peter H. Voelker, Deputy Clerk

Case 2:06-cv-00248-RSL Document 7 Filed 04/13/06 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 197 (Friday, October 13, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70930-70931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22543]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 
Binational Panel Reviews: Notice of Completion of Panel Review

AGENCY: United States Section, NAFTA Secretariat, International Trade 
Administration, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of completion of panel review in the matter of Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada; Final Negative Injury 
Determination (Secretariat File Number: USA-CDA-2020-1904-05).

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

SUMMARY: The USA-CDA-2020-1904-05 Panel has granted a consent motion 
filed on behalf of the Full Member Subgroup of the American Institute 
of Steel Construction, LLC, requesting the termination of panel review 
in the Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada; Final Negative 
Injury Determination (Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada IN) 
dispute. Given the Panel's ruling on this consent motion, and pursuant 
to Rule 71(2) of the NAFTA Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 
Binational Panel Reviews (Rules), the Fabricated Structural Steel from 
Canada IN dispute has been terminated. As a result, and in accordance 
with Rule 78(a), notice is hereby given that panel review of the 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada IN dispute has been completed 
effective September 28, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vidya Desai, United States Secretary, 
NAFTA Secretariat, Room 2061, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 
DC 20230, (202) 482-5438.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter 19 of article 1904 of NAFTA provides 
a

[[Page 70931]]

dispute settlement mechanism involving trade remedy determinations 
issued by the government of the United States, the government of 
Canada, and the government of Mexico. There are established Rules, 
which were adopted by the three governments and require Notices of 
Completion of Panel Review to be published in accordance with Rule 78. 
For the complete Rules, please see https://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/Home/Texts-of-the-Agreement/Rules-of-Procedure/Article-1904.

    Dated: October 6, 2023.
Vidya Desai,
U.S. Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat.
[FR Doc. 2023-22543 Filed 10-12-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-GT-P
No. 61120.

protest 300295-K/8584 (Chicago).

#### National Carloading Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bamboo poles similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 59620, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 259

Designating the week beginning September 20, 1998, as ‘‘National

Historically Black Colleges and Universities Week’’, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 29, 1998

Mr. THURMOND (for himself, Mr. D’AMATO, Mr. HOLLINGS, Mr. ROBB, Mr.

TORRICELLI, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. BOND, Mr.

BROWNBACK, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. CLELAND, Mr. SARBANES, Mrs.

HUTCHISON, Mr. INOUYE, and Mr. FRIST) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

SEPTEMBER 22, 1998

Committee discharged; considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Designating the week beginning September 20, 1998, as

‘‘National Historically Black Colleges and Universities

Week’’, and for other purposes.

Whereas there are 104 historically black colleges and universities in the United States;

Whereas black colleges and universities provide the quality

education so essential to full participation in a complex,

highly technological society;

Whereas black colleges and universities have a rich heritage

and have played a prominent role in American history;
2

SRES 259 ATS

Whereas black colleges and universities have allowed many

underprivileged students to attain their full potential

through higher education; and

Whereas the achievements and goals of historically black colleges and universities are deserving of national recognition: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate—

2 (1) designates the week beginning September

3 20, 1998, as ‘‘National Historically Black Colleges

4 and Universities Week’’; and

5 (2) requests that the President of the United

6 States issue a proclamation calling on the people of

7 the United States and interested groups to observe

8 the week with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and

9 programs to demonstrate support for historically

10 black colleges and universities in the United States.

Æ
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL

PAGE - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

LUCIANO TONELLI, )

)

Plaintiff, ) CASE NO. C06-698-TSZ-JPD

)

v. )

)

SARGENT AUTRY, et al., ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

) MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

)

Defendants. )

____________________________________)

 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action, has filed a motion seeking an

Order compelling defendants to provide information regarding the whereabouts of a former

correctional officer, Brandon Siivone, whom plaintiff has named as a defendant. (Dkt. #38). Two

attempts by the Clerk to serve Mr. Siivone by mail with a copy of the complaint in this matter have

been futile. (Dkt. #19, #33). Defendants have filed a response to the motion to compel. (Dkt. #41). 

Plaintiff has not filed a reply. Having considered the motion and response, and the balance of the

record, the court does hereby find and ORDER:

(1) Plaintiff’s motion to compel (Dkt. #38) is DENIED. First, it does not appear that

plaintiff has served an actual discovery request on defendants seeking the whereabouts of Mr.

Siivone. (Dkt. 41 at 2). Second, it does not appear that plaintiff sought to confer with defendants

prior to filing the instant motion, as required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and Local

Rule CR 37. (Id.) Third, even if plaintiff’s motion were not deficient in these respects, it appears

that defendants have already proved the court with the most recent address that they have for Mr.

Siivone, and the Clerk’s attempt at serving him by mail has failed. (Dkt. #33). 

Case 2:06-cv-00698-TSZ Document 42 Filed 11/27/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL

PAGE - 2

(2) As the court has previously advised plaintiff, it is his duty to ascertain the current

address of Mr. Siivone in order to enable the court to effectuate service of the complaint. On

October 24, 2006, the court sua sponte granted plaintiff an additional 45 days in which to locate Mr.

Siivone. (Dkt. #35). That time period will elapse on December 8, 2006. Accordingly, if plaintiff is

unable to provide a current address for Mr. Siivone by that date, the court will dismiss him from the

case.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to plaintiff, to counsel for

defendants, and to the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly.

DATED this 27th day of November, 2006.

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-cv-00698-TSZ Document 42 Filed 11/27/06 Page 2 of 2
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 276

Expressing the Sense of the Senate that the President should reimburse

the American taxpayer for costs associated with the Independent Counsel’s investigation of his relationship with Ms. Monica Lewinsky.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 15, 1998

Mr. MURKOWSKI submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Expressing the Sense of the Senate that the President should

reimburse the American taxpayer for costs associated

with the Independent Counsel’s investigation of his relationship with Ms. Monica Lewinsky.

Whereas, on January 17, 1998, President Clinton testified in

a sexual harassment lawsuit brought by Paula Jones and

denied a sexual relationship with a former White House

intern Monica Lewinsky;

Whereas President Clinton’s personal lawyer, David Kendall,

stated on September 13, 1998, that the President ‘‘absolutely’’ sought to mislead Ms. Jones’ lawyers in the January 17 deposition;
2

SRES 276 IS

Whereas, during a January 26, 1998 White House news conference, President Clinton stated, ‘‘I did not have sexual

relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky’’;

Whereas President Clinton invoked Executive Privilege in an

effort to limit grand jury questioning of aides Bruce

Lindsey, Sidney Blumenthal, Cheryl Mills, Nancy

Hernreich, and Lanny Breuer;

Whereas none of President Clinton’s claims of Executive

Privilege were ever supported by the courts;

Whereas, on May 22, a Federal judge denied a previous motion by the President to prevent Secret Service agents

from being compelled to testify before a grand jury;

Whereas, on July 7, 1998, a Federal appeals court denied the

President’s appeal and ruled that Secret Service employees must tell the grand jury what they observed by

guarding the President;

Whereas, on July 29, 1998, President Clinton agreed to testify from the White House in response to a subpoena

issued by the Independent Counsel’s office;

Whereas, on August 17, 1998, President Clinton testified before a grand jury and made an address to the nation admitting ‘‘an improper relationship’’ with Monica

Lewinsky;

Whereas the President has unnecessarily and improperly prolonged the investigation of Independent Counsel Kenneth

Starr;

Whereas the President knowingly provided inaccurate information in a sworn deposition and in public statements

about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky; and
3

SRES 276 IS

Whereas the President invoked improper claims of Executive

Privilege, attorney-client privilege and Secret Service

privileges: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That—

2 (1) it is the sense of the Senate that President

3 Clinton has unnecessarily delayed the investigation

4 of the Independent Counsel; and

5 (2) President Clinton should reimburse the

6 American taxpayer for the costs associated with the

7 Independent Counsel’s investigation of his relation8 ship with Ms. Lewinsky.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         797,785
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,306,671
<PP&E>                                         120,309
<DEPRECIATION>                                  64,270
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,001,956
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          650,034
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    600,000
<COMMON>                                         4,029
<OTHER-SE>                                     747,839
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,001,956
<SALES>                                        380,050
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               380,050
<CGS>                                          238,088
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  744,890
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,545
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (366,385)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       695
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (367,080)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (367,080)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.10)
        

</TABLE>
```

[111th Congress Public Law 35]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

Public Law 111-35
111th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the Federal building located at 799 United Nations Plaza in 
 New York, New York, as the ``Ronald H. Brown United States Mission to 
  the United Nations Building''. <<NOTE: June 30, 2009 -  [H.R. 837]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building located at 799 United Nations Plaza in New 
York, New York, shall be known and designated as the ``Ronald H. Brown 
United States Mission to the United Nations Building''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building referred to in 
section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Ronald H. Brown 
United States Mission to the United Nations Building''.

    Approved June 30, 2009.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 837:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 111-28 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
            Mar. 10, considered and passed House.
            June 17, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
Case No. 8,875.

#### McLAUGHLIN v. TURNER.

[1 Cranch. C. C. 476.]*1*

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term, 1807.

.Pleading at Law — Assumpsit — Account Count —Account Filed — Day Stated.

1. Upon a count “for sundry matters properly chargeable in account, as by account annexed," it is not necessary that the account should be such as would be evidence per se under Aet Md. 1729, c. 20.

2. The day stated in the declaration is not material. so that the articles were delivered and payable before the action brought.

The first count of the declaration stated' that the defendant [Samuel Turner] was indebted to the plaintiff [McLaughlin’s administrator] “for sundry matters properly chargeable in account, as by an account there*235unto annexed.” The second count -was for hoard and lodging, and other necessaries for twelve months. The plaintiff produced an account for a tavern-bill, and proved that he presented the account to the defendant, who said there were other credits on a former account, and he would produce them, and settle the account

Caldwell *&*Morsell, for defendant,

contended that the evidence did not support the first count, and that no evidence could be given upon that count, but an account which would in itself have been evidence under the act of 1729 (chapter 20), under which act alone they contended the count was good. The issues were non assumpsit and limitations. There was no demurrer.

But

THE COURT

(nem. con.) said, if the count is bad, he might have demurred, or might move in arrest of judgment But if the count is good, there can be no question but that the evidence offered will support it.

Mr. Morsell contended also, that the plaintiff could not give in evidence any charge for articles delivered before the 4th of May, 1805, the day laid in the declaration.

But THE COURT (nem. con.) said the day was immaterial, so that the articles were de-liveredand payablebefore the action brought.
No. 64647.

#### Verona Dyestuffs *v.*United States,

protests 59/32583 and 59/33964 (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is a product chiefly used as an assistant in preparing or finishing textiles, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the Third Division,

December 27, 1951

No. 56202.

protests 101807-K, etc. (San Diego).

#### Ralph Boone et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 55679.

protests 100790-K, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### Atlas Trading Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The protests were dismissed.