alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016007EN.01001001.xml

| 11.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/10

---

Action brought on 16 October 2015 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-546/15)

(2016/C 007/16)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes, M. Heller and E. Sanfrutos Cano, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 24(1) of Directive 2012/19/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on waste electrical and electronic equipment, (1) or by failing to notify those provisions to the Commission, the defendant had failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 24(1) of Directive 2012/19/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on waste electrical and electronic equipment, (1) or by failing to notify those provisions to the Commission, the defendant had failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| — | order the defendant, in accordance with Article 260(3) TFEU, on account of its failure to fulfil the obligation to notify implementing measures, to pay a penalty payment in the daily amount of EUR 210 078, payable to the own-resources account of the European Union, as from the date of the Court’s judgment declaring that there has been a failure to fulfil obligations; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant, in accordance with Article 260(3) TFEU, on account of its failure to fulfil the obligation to notify implementing measures, to pay a penalty payment in the daily amount of EUR 210 078, payable to the own-resources account of the European Union, as from the date of the Court’s judgment declaring that there has been a failure to fulfil obligations;

| — | order Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The period for transposition of the directive expired on 14 February 2014.

---

(1)  OJ 2012 L 197, p. 38.

1

---
No. 46327.

#### Protest 990342-G of New York Mdse. Co., Inc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Dallingeb, J.

It was stipulated that the,soap boxes in question are similar to those passed upon in Abstract 41499. The claim at 40 percent under paragraph 339 was therefore sustained. .
**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **QENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN**  o-CMAnll a-n .nmmu 

### TM8 OPnIOH mmuux UvmmLm o?nrosM-Wl P. cllatan owloy, Imeotr 

### eu Htlutiu 

### Dlr1rtoa

an Ho. 0-lJ41, **detod** 0r uO0~0 mv **~0d**

8OOtiOA 

### 2 b, **WbUatiOn** 

### (2) if%~~~~lrltlu of tho 

### b\rThey lr oz a r e, uroa n d /or

rrkbl y a n d rd. 0 of

8ubrootion 

### (3) of Uotlon 2 b, ~~JOJD 14mtloal 01Ulon. Thorororo for uoh ll0eBm.'1**uo& a bead maot 

### k mppued.AP?8ovnl OPIHIOH CaEHITTti 

### 4 /8 / l.W. D., c h o l r n a
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DARREN T. VALMYR,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-90

[March 29, 2018]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; David A. Haimes, Judge; L.T. Case No. 15-012523 

CF10A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Patrick B. Burke, Assistant 

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mitchell A. 

Egber, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

CIKLIN, CONNER, JJ., and ROBERTS, KATHLEEN H., Associate Judge, concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# C_2017095EN.01002601.xml

| 27.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/26

---

Corrigendum to the notice in the Official Journal in Case F-104/15: Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (3rd Chamber) of 20 July 2016 — U (*) v Commission (Civil service — Survivor’s pension — Articles 18 and 20 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations — Surviving spouse of a former official — Eligibility — Second marriage — Equal treatment of officials)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 364 of 3 October 2016
  , as re-published for reasons of protection of personal data)

Official Journal of the European Union C 364 of 3 October 2016

(2017/C 095/34)

On page 4, in the table of contents, on page 33 and on page 34, ‘U (*)’ is replaced by ‘RN (*)’.

---
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Essential Air Service at 

MACON, GEORGIA 

Under 49 U.S.C. §41731 et seq. 

OST-2007-28671 

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION RELATING TO THE 

GULFSTREAM INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES 

BID TO PROVIDE SUBSIDIZED AIR SERICE AT 

MACON, GEORGIA 

Correspondence with regard to this document should be addressed to: 

Mickey Bowman 

Vice President of Corporate Development 

Gulfstream International Airlines 

3201 Griffin Road, 4"^ Floor 

Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33312 

Telephone: 270-689-2180 

Fax:270-689-2180 

E-Mail: mbowman@gulfstreamair.com 

Gulfstream International Airlines ("Gulfstream") hereby submits supplemental information relating to its 

proposal to provide subsidized air service to Macon, Georgia, dated June 21, 2010. 

In its filing, Gulfstream stated that it proposed to operate the aforementioned Macon, Georgia flights under 

its existing codeshare relationship with Continental Airlines. It has since been determined that the service 

outlined in our proposal will not be operated under that relationship. Rather, the proposed service linking 

Macon with Orlando, Florida and Tampa, Florida will be operated under the independent Gulfstream 

International Airline identity. Gulfstream, as an independent airline, maintains interline baggage and 

ticketing agreements with most legacy carriers. Gulfstream proposes to distribute these flights via its own 

reservation system allowing sale through both a web based booking engine and through other Global 

Distribution Systems. As an independent airline, Gulfstream will be in full control of its scheduling and 

pricing and will maintain the low local fares that are the basis for the noted traffic stimulation of this bid. 

Customers with destinations beyond Orlando or Tampa will find that these low local fares will pair nicely 

with the low fares already offered from Orlando and Tampa by both low cost carriers as well as the legacy 

carriers. 

Gulfstream believes the net affect of this change to the consumer will be negligible and the overall product 

will be both functional and desirable. 

Respectfully Submitted: July 9, 2010 
Mickey Bowman 

Vice President of Corporate Development 

Gulfstream International Airlines
March 6, 1971

No. 71-13

#### Gerald D. McLemore, PVT, U. S. Army v United States.

ORDERED:

That said Petitions be, and the same are hereby, denied without prejudice to raise this issue before the trial court and before any appellate courts.

' (J. DARDEN would dismiss the Petitions for he believes the relief requested is not in aid of this Court’s jurisdiction.)
(logo)Deutsche Bank

1761East St. Andrew Place

SantaAna, CA 92705-4934

 

Tel714 247 6000

Fax714 247 6009 

 

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

 

COMM 2016-787S Mortgage Trust

 

The undersigned,David Co, a Director of Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as theCertificate Administrator (a "Certifying Servicer") under the Trustand Servicing Agreement, dated as of March 1, 2016 (the "Agreement''), byand among, Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation, as Depositor,Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer and SpecialServicer, Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee, and Deutsche BankTrust Company Americas, as Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent, andCustodian, here by certifies in accordance with Section 11.07 of the Agreement:

 

A)      Areview of such Certifying Servicer's activities from January 1, 2017 toDecember 31, 2017 (the "reporting period") and of such CertifyingServicer's performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer'ssupervision and

 

B)     That,as to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, suchCertifying Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement, inall material respects through the reporting period.

 

 

DEUTSCHEBANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS

AsCertificate Administrator

 

/s/David Co

BY: David Co

Title: Director

Date: March 1, 2018
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------


                         CERTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 906
                                     OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Unico American
Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Erwin Cheldin,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 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, as amended; and

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



                    /s/  Erwin Cheldin
                    ------------------
           Name:    Erwin Cheldin
           Title:   Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
           Date:    November 11, 2005




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Unico American Corporation, and
will be retained by Unico American Corporation, and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
STANDARD REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT CBI:No

P-10-0246

Standard Review Draft 12/15/2010

ENGINEER: Prothero \ JAS

PV (kg/yr): 

Revision Notes/Assessment Overview: SRER draft 12/15/10: Revised volume, domestic operations, and 

associated estimates based on new info from submitter in 12/12/2010 faxed letter.

SUBMITTER: UBE America Inc. (submitter)

USE:

OTHER USES:

MSDS: Yes LABEL: No

Gen Eqpt: vinyl or rubber gloves/ dust goggle / dust preventive clothing / local exhaust ventilation/ general 

mechanical ventilation.

Respirator: dust protective N100 mask.

Health Effects: corrosive to eyes / avoid skin contact / toxic if swallowed / may be harmful if inhaled.

TLV/PEL: - Cobalt - 1.5 % - TLV-TWA - ACGIH - Cobalt - 1.5 % - TLV-TWA Respirable particulate - ACGIH - 

Cobalt - 1.5 % - TLV-TWA inhalable particulate - ACGIH - Cobalt - 1.5 % - TWA PEL - OSHA

CRSS: (5/20/2010):

Chemical Name: Multi-walled carbon nanotubes

S-H2O: 0.000001 g/L @ 

VP: 1.0E-6 torr @ 
MW: 0 0.0%<500 0.0%<1000

Physical State and Misc CRSS Info:

Neat: Solid Mfg: NK: Import

Proc/Form: End Use:

Consumer Use:

SAT (concerns): (5/21/2010):

Migration to groundwater: Other (please specify)

PBT rating: P3 B3 T1

Health: 2, Dermal, Inhalation

Eco: 1, No releases to Water

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 2A

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS:

Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER. Focus IRER Notes: 

The PB rating is P3B3; a full assessment is required. 

POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS:

None.

P2 REC:

EXPOSURE-BASED REVIEW: No (0 criteria met)
P-10-0246

Number of Sites/Location: 1 submitter site(s) 

unknown site(s) 

Basis: 

Process Description: 

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes: 

Basis: 
Proc3: 

Number of Sites/Location: 1 submitter site(s) 

unknown site(s) 

Basis: 

Process Description:

ENVIRONMENTAL RELEASES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

IRER Note: The daily releases listed for any source below may coincide with daily releases from the other sources 

to the same medium. 
OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes: 

Basis: 

Dermal:

Inhalation:

Dermal:
P-10-0246

Number of Sites/Location: 1 submitter site(s) 

unknown site(s) 

Basis: 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURES ESTIMATE SUMMARY

Tot. # of workers exposed via assessed routes: 

Basis:
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-30937

Summary Calendar

__________________

Charles Carrigan,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

Edgar C. Day, Warden, Washington Correctional

Institution; Richard P. Ieyoub, Attorney 

General, State of Louisiana,

Respondents-Appellees.

______________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. CA95-1213-E 

______________________________________________

April 17, 1996

 

Before KING, SMITH, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

BENAVIDES, Circuit Judge:*

Charles Carrigan appeals from the district court's dismissal

without prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of

habeas corpus, for failure to exhaust state remedies. A review of

the record supports the district court's finding that, as to most

of the claims Carrigan now raises, he has failed to seek relief
2

from the Louisiana Supreme Court. See Carrigan v. Day, No. CA95-

1213-E (E.D. La. Aug. 2, 1995). Carrigan's assertion that

exhaustion would be an "exercise in futility" is not supported by

the record. The district court correctly dismissed Carrigan's §

2254 action for failure to exhaust his state remedies.

AFFIRMED.
# C_2015279EN.01005801.xml

| 24.8.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/58

---

Action brought on 26 May 2015 — ZZ and ZZ v Commission

(Case F-80/15)

(2015/C 279/74)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: ZZ and ZZ (represented by: T. Bontinck and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Commission

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

A finding of the unlawfulness of Article 45 of and Annex I to the Staff Regulations of Officials and the transitional measures relating thereto, and annulment of the decisions of the Appointing Authority not to include the applicants on the list of officials promoted to grade AD 13 or AD 14 in promotion year 2014.

Form of order sought

| — | Principally:






  — | Find that Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and Annex I thereto, as well as the transitional measures relating thereto are unlawful; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

Principally:

—

Find that Article 45 of the Staff Regulations and Annex I thereto, as well as the transitional measures relating thereto are unlawful;

| — | Annul the decision of the Appointing Authority not to include the applicants on the list of officials promoted to grade AD 13 or AD 14 in promotion year 2014 provided for in Article 45 of the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Appointing Authority not to include the applicants on the list of officials promoted to grade AD 13 or AD 14 in promotion year 2014 provided for in Article 45 of the Staff Regulations;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs;

| — | In the alternative:






  — | Annul the decision of the Appointing Authority not to include the applicants on the list of officials promoted to grade AD 13 or AD 14 in promotion year 2014 provided for in Article 45 of the Staff Regulations; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

In the alternative:

—

Annul the decision of the Appointing Authority not to include the applicants on the list of officials promoted to grade AD 13 or AD 14 in promotion year 2014 provided for in Article 45 of the Staff Regulations;

| — | Order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
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 

The following Agreements were filed with the Department of Transportation under the Sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1383 and 1384) and procedures governing proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 days after the filing of the application. 

*Docket Number:*                     OST-2007-27953.                 

*Date Filed:*                     April 16, 2007.                 

*Parties:*                     Members of the International Air Transport Association.                 

*Subject:*                     Mail Vote 532—Resolution 010o, TC3 Special Passenger Amending Resolution, between Japan and China (excluding Hong SAR and Macao SAR), (Memo 1080), Intended effective date: 1 September 2007.                 

Renee V. Wright, 

Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.

 [FR Doc. E7-8173 Filed 4-27-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
No. 49873.

#### Protests 31129-K, etc., of Products from Sweden, Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 47562.

#### Protests 25525-K, etc., of Lau & Co. et al. (Honolulu).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following *Wing Duck*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 133, C. D. 446) the merchandise in question was held not to be distilled spirits and therefore not subject to the internal revenue tax. The protests were sustained as to certain of the items.
**Exhibit 34.2**

 

Report of Independent Registered Public AccountingFirm

 

The Board of Directors

U.S. Bank National Association

 

We have examined management’s assertion,included in the accompanying Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that U.S. Bank National Association(the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’sRegulation AB for the U.S. Bank Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform (the “Platform”), for which the companyprovides trustee, securities administration, registrar and paying agent services, as of and for the year ended March 31, 2017,except for servicing criteria 1122 (d)(1)(i)-(v), 1122 (d)(2)(i), 1122 (d)(2)(iii), 1122 (d)(2)(v)-(vii), 1122 (d)(3)(i), and 1122(d)(4)(i)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by them with respect to the servicingplatform covered by this report. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Ourresponsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with the servicingcriteria based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordancewith attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public CompanyAccounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’scompliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.Our examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise thePlatform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processedthose selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore, ourprocedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period coveredby this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either prior to or subsequent toour tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by thisreport for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis forour opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’s assertionthat the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended March 31, 2017, for the U.S.Bank Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

 

May 25, 2017