alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2007199EN.01005201.xml

| 25.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 199/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/52

---

Action brought on 18 June 2007 — Martin Bermejo v Commission

(Case F-60/07)

(2007/C 199/100)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Joaquin Martin Bermejo (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare the unlawfulness of the Commission decision of 28 April 2004 adopting the new General Implementing Provisions of Article 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations and, to the extent that it is necessary, the unlawfulness of those provisions of the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the unlawfulness of the Commission decision of 28 April 2004 adopting the new General Implementing Provisions of Article 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations and, to the extent that it is necessary, the unlawfulness of those provisions of the Staff Regulations;

| — | annul the Commission decision of 27 September 2006 inasmuch as it fixes the calculation of credited pension rights transferred by the applicant to the Community pension scheme; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the Commission decision of 27 September 2006 inasmuch as it fixes the calculation of credited pension rights transferred by the applicant to the Community pension scheme;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant pleads the unlawfulness of the General Implementing Provisions of Article 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations on the transfer of pension rights (1), inasmuch as the rule set out in Article 7(3) thereof infringes Council Regulation (EC) No 1103/97 of 17 June 1997 on certain provisions relating to the introduction of the euro (2) and the principle of equal treatment, as interpreted by the Civil Service Tribunal in its judgment of 14 November 2006 in Case F-100/05 Chatziioannidou v Commission (not yet published).

1

2

Chatziioannidou

Commission

---

(1)  Administrative Notice No 60/2004 of 9 June 2004.

1

(2)  OJ 1997 L 162, p. 1.

2

---
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS I, Carl E. Vogel, the Chief Executive Officer of CCH II, LLC and CCH II Capital
Corp. (collectively, the Company) in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby
certify that, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2004 (the Report) filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission:  
    
    fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company. /s/ Carl E. VogelCarl E. VogelChief Executive OfficerNovember 12, 2004
FLATHEAD

SAUSH THE CONFEDERATED SALISH AND KOOTENAI TRIBES OF THE FLATHEAD NATION P

. O
. BOX 278 Pablo , Montana 59855 (406) 275 - 2700 FAX (406 ) 275-2806 w w w . c s kt.org A People o f Vision TRIBAL COUNCIL MEMBERS: 1\ Confedera ti on of th e Sali s h . Ron ald Tra han- Chainnan Carole Lankford
- Vice Chair James Y. Matt - Secre tary Len Twotceth- Tr easur er Vernon S . Finl ey P

end d' O r e ill es and K oo t e na i Trib es


### Sadie Hoskie, Director EPA Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver. CO 80202-1129 January 8, 2014 Shelly R. Fyant L

eonard W. Gray Lloyd D . Irvin e T

erry L. Pins Patty S t ev

en s

RE: Request for 401 Water Quality Certification ofEPA ' s NPD E S Multi-SectorGenera1-Pem1it (MSGP) , on the Flathead Indian Re s ervati on -Montana Dear Ms. Hoskie , The Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Natural Resomces Department (NRD) received United State s Environmental Protection Agency 's (U SEPA ) reque s t for 40 I Certification o f the National Pollution Disch a rge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Pollutant Discharges authorized under this permit within the exterior boundaries of the Flathead Indian Reservation Montana . The N RD staff reviewed the pernlit to determine if Tribal water quality standards would be met by the permit requirements. All surface waters on the Flathead Reservation have been classified and are subject to the water quality standard s described in the Tribe's Surface Water Quality Standards and Anti
- degradation Policy (2006). Pursuant to Section 401 of the C l ean Water Act and 40 CFR Part 121 , the Tribal NRD grants 401 Certification of the NPDES Multi
- Sector
- General -P ermit (MSGP) , covering Industrial Stormwater Discharges as long as s uch discharges will comply with applicab le provisions of Sections 301, 303 , 306 , and 307 ofthe Act. The NRD appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the General Permit for discharges from wastewater lagoon systems on the Reservation . If y ou have an y questions please call C lint Folden , Water Quality Regulatory Speciali st at 406 675-2700 (ex1.7255) email address: clintf @ cskt.org . Thank You . Sincerely ,

# ~~A~ Rich Janssen, Natural Resources Department Head Cc: Mike Durglo, Environmental Protection Division Paula Webster, Water Quality Program John Harrison, Tribal Legal Department
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary 

          - [Notice of Order (Order 2007-3- ); Docket OST-2006-25307] 

# AGENCY:

Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation. 

# SUMMARY:

The Department is issuing an order withdrawing its approval under 49 U.S.C. 41309 for an International Air Transport Association (“IATA”) agreement, the Provisions for the Conduct of the IATA Traffic Conferences, insofar as that agreement establishes conferences whereby IATA's member carriers discuss and agree upon passenger fares and cargo rates for U.S.-Australia/Europe markets. The withdrawal of approval will become effective on June 30, 2007. The Department's withdrawal of its approval for the agreement will end the agreement's immunity from the antitrust laws under 49 U.S.C. 41308 for conference discussions of fares and rates for the U.S.-Australia/Europe markets. This order makes final the tentative findings and conclusions set forth in the Department's show-cause order, Order 2006-7-3 (July 5, 2006). 

# DATES:

The withdrawal of approval will become effective on June 30, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        John Kiser, Pricing & Multilateral Affairs Division (X-43, Room 6424), U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh St, SW., Washington, DC                               ( print page 16869)                            20590, (202) 366-2435; or Donald A. Horn, Assistant General Counsel for International Law (C-20, Room 10118), U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-2972.                     

Dated: March 30, 2007. 

Andrew B. Steinberg, 

Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs.

 [FR Doc. E7-6354 Filed 4-4-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
#### Stephen Tunstall, *Respondent, v.*Walter W. Winton, *Appellant.*

— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements,' for the reason assigned by Lawrence, J.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [License No. 09/79-0398] 

Notice is hereby given that Sorrento Growth Partners I, L.P., 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 1040, San Diego, CA 92122, a Federal Licensee under the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (“the Act”), in connection with the financing of a small concern, has sought an exemption under Section 312 of the Act and Section 107.730, Financings which Constitute Conflicts of Interest of the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730 (2006)). Sorrento Growth Partners I, L.P. provided debt financing to Perlan Therapeutics, Inc., 6310 Nancy Ridge Drive, Suite 102, San Diego, CA 92121. The financing is contemplated for operating expenses and general corporate purposes. 

The financing is brought within the purview of § 107.730(a)(1) of the Regulations because three Associates, Sorrento Ventures CE, L.P., Sorrento Ventures III, L.P. and Sorrento Ventures IV, L.P., by way of common management, collectively own more than ten percent of the Company. Therefore, Perlan Therapeutics, Inc. is also considered an Associate of Sorrento Growth Partners I, L.P. as defined at 13 CFR 107.50 of the SBIC Regulations. 

Notice is hereby given that any interested person may submit written comments on the transaction to the Associate Administrator for Investment, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20416. 

Jaime Guzmn-Fournier, 

Associate Administrator for Investment.

[FR Doc. E7-6638 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
# C_2007170EN.01002201.xml

| 21.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 170/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 170/22

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 June 2007 — Assembled Investments (Proprietary) v OHIM — Waterford Wedgwood (WATERFORD STELLENBOSCH)

(Case T-105/05) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the figurative Community mark WATERFORD STELLENBOSCH - Earlier Community word mark WATERFORD - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Absence of similarity between the goods - Absence of complementarity - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)

(2007/C 170/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd (Stellenbosch, South Africa) (represented by: P. Hagmann and S. Ziegler, Lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court of First Instance: Waterford Wedgwood plc (Waterford, Ireland) (represented by: K. Manhaeve, Lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court of First Instance:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 December 2004 (Case R 240/2004-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Waterford Wedgwood and Assembled Investments (Proprietary) Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 December 2004 (Case R 240/2004-1); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 December 2004 (Case R 240/2004-1);

| 2. | Orders the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Waterford Wedgwood plc to pay, in addition to their own costs, the costs incurred by the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) and Waterford Wedgwood plc to pay, in addition to their own costs, the costs incurred by the applicant.

---

(1)  OJ C 115, 14.5.2005.

1

---
(Reap. Dec. 9219)

#### Henry A. Wess, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 391, etc.

(Decided September 4, 1958)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General *(Henry J. O’Neill,*trial attorney), for the defendant.

Lawbence, Judge:

The appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in the schedule, attached to and made part of the decision herein, were consolidated for hearing and determination.

The merchandise involved consists of beta naphthol flakes. It was admitted by Government counsel that, in appraising said merchandise, the importations, through inadvertence, were appraised as beta naphthol powder on the basis of the American selling price (section 402 (g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (g)), as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938).

The involved appeals for a reappraisement were submitted for decision on the offlcial papers and a stipulation of fact, whereby it was agreed by the parties hereto that the involved merchandise is a coal-tar product, namely, beta naphthol flakes; that such merchandise was entered at its c. i. f. New York price; and that the American selling price for the involved merchandise is 35 cents per pound, net packed, instead of 37 cents per pound, net packed, as appraised.

Upon the record before the court, I find and hold that the American selling price, as that value is defined in section 402 (g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, *supra,*is the proper basis for determining the value of the involved beta naphthol flakes and that said value is 35 cents per pound, net packed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Case: 2:11-cv-00320-JLG-MRA Doc #: 21 Filed: 05/23/12 Page: 1 of 1  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-08T19:23:15-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
No. 58148.

protest 219838-K (New York).

#### Malino Veilings *v.*United States,

*517Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of veils or veilings similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 57645, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8909 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 82–6110 Mamalahoa Highway in Captain 

Cook, Hawaii, as the ‘‘Army 1st Lt. John Kuulei 

Kauhaihao Post Office Building’’. 

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

•HR 8909 EH

1 SECTION 1. ARMY 1ST LT. JOHN KUULEI KAUHAIHAO POST 

2 OFFICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 82–6110 Mamalahoa Highway 

5 in Captain Cook, Hawaii, shall be known and designated 

6 as the ‘‘Army 1st Lt. John Kuulei Kauhaihao Post Office 

7 Building’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

11 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Army 1st Lt. John 

12 Kuulei Kauhaihao Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 4, 

2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8909 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Posting’’. Lt. John Kuulei Kauhaihao Post Office Build- way in Captain Cook, Hawaii, as the ‘‘Army 1st al Service located at 82–6110 Mamalahoa High-
# C_2007155EN.01002801.xml

| 7.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/28

---

Action brought on 2 May 2007 — Pioneer Hi-Bred International v Commission

(Case T-139/07)

(2007/C 155/53)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc. (Johnston, USA) (represented by: J. Temple Lang, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Find that the Commission has failed to act in accordance with Article 18 of Directive 2001/18 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms, in having failed to submit to the Regulatory Committee a draft of the measures to be taken pursuant to Article 5(2) of the Council decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

Find that the Commission has failed to act in accordance with Article 18 of Directive 2001/18 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms, in having failed to submit to the Regulatory Committee a draft of the measures to be taken pursuant to Article 5(2) of the Council decision;

| — | order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant claims, pursuant to Article 232 EC, that the Commission has failed to act, in infringement of Article 18 of Directive 2001/18/EC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (1), to ensure the adoption of a decision concerning the applicant's notification for the placing on the market of insect-resistant genetically modified maize 1507.

1

The applicant contends that under the procedure set out in the directive, the Commission is obliged to ensure that a decision on a notification is adopted and published within the period of time prescribed in the directive. The applicant furthermore submits that by failing to submit to the Regulatory Committee a draft of the measures to be taken the Commission failed to ensure that such a decision was adopted even though all requirements on the applicant and other parties under the directive had been completed in accordance with the directive.

The applicant moreover submits that the Commission has been called upon to define its position within the terms of Article 232 EC which the Commission has failed to do. This has, according to the applicant, had adverse effects on the applicant's legal situation.

---

(1)  Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC (OJ 2001 L 106, p. 1).

1

---
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Quanta Capital Holdings Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") and
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted in Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Robert Lippincott III, Interim Chief Executive
Officer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

    1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
    15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

    2.  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: August 9, 2006

/s/ Robert Lippincott III
---------------------------------
Robert Lippincott III
(Principal Executive Officer)

This certification is not deemed to be "filed" for purposes of section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that
section. This certification is not deemed to be incorporated by reference into
any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
```
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8675 

To require the Transportation Security Administration conduct a study relating to the digitization of the law enforcement officer flying armed checkpoint data collection process, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 11, 2024 

Mr. GARBARINO (for himself and Mr. KENNEDY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To require the Transportation Security Administration conduct a study relating to the digitization of the law enforcement officer flying armed checkpoint data collection 

process, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Repair of the National 

5 Law Enforcement Telecommunications System Act of 

6 2024’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8675 IH

1 SEC. 2. STUDY RELATING TO DIGITIZATION OF THE LAW 

2 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FLYING ARMED 

3 CHECKPOINT DATA COLLECTION PROCESS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

5 date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of 

6 the Transportation Security Administration, acting 

7 through the Director of the Federal Air Marshal Service, 

8 shall conduct a study on the digital data collection process 

9 for law enforcement officers who are flying armed. 

10 (b) ELEMENTS.—The study required under sub11 section (a) shall examine the following: 

12 (1) Projected timelines for the digital data col13 lection process referred to in such subsection. 

14 (2) Estimated resources required to implement 

15 such process. 

16 (c) BRIEFING; ACCESSIBILITY.—Upon completion of 

17 the study required under subsection (a), the Administrator 

18 of the Transportation Security Administration shall— 

19 (1) provide to the Committee on Homeland Se20 curity of the House of Representatives and the Com21 mittee on Science, Commerce, and Transportation 

22 and the Committee on Homeland Security and Gov23 ernmental Affairs of the Senate a briefing on the 

24 findings of such study; and 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8675 IH

1 (2) make such study accessible in a digital for2 mat suitable for use by the Administration. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS