alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004

- 2595  p202 624

- 2500  f202 628

- 5116

Crowell & Moring LLP  www.crowell.com  Washington, DC  New York  San Francisco  Los Angeles  Orange County  Anchorage  London  Brussels Steven J. Seiden

(202) 624

- 2609

sseiden@crowell.com

March 26 , 2015

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Mr. Paul Gretch

Director

Office of International Aviation

U.S. Department of Transportation

Room W86

- 316

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: Polling Results for Motion of United Airlines, Inc. for a 60

- Day Start

- Up Extension

( San Francisco

- Shanghai, China ), Docket DOT

- OST

- 2014

- 0196

Dear Mr. Gretch:

United 1 has polled and received non

- objections from each of the carriers served with the

above

- referenced Motion . Prompt approval is requested so that United can continue to

coordinate with local Chinese government officials and airp ort authorities to secure slot times at

Shanghai Pudong International Airport that are compatible with United’s expanded San

Francisco

- Shanghai service, which it intends to commence as soon as practicable but in no event

later than July 15, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

Steven J. Seiden

Counsel for

United Airlines, Inc.

cc: Robert Finamore

Brian Hedberg

Brett Kruger

All Parties on the attached Service List

1 Common names are used for airlines.Crowell & Moring LLP  www.crowell.com  Washington, DC  New York  San Francisco  Los Angeles  Orange County  Anchorage  London  Brussels SERVICE LIST

robert.wirick@aa.com

howard.kass@aa.com

rpommer@atlasair.com

nssparks@fedex.com

gbleopard@fedex.com

sllunsford@fedex.com

jhill@cooley.com

perkmann@cooley.com anita.mosner@hklaw.com

jennifer.nowak@hklaw.com

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

sametta.c.barnett@delta.com

chris.walker@delta.com

dwight.moore@ustranscom.mil

john.s.duncan@faa.gov

englets@state.gov
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Publications 
-  Treesearch 
-                       Lake Tahoe watershed assessment: volume II.                  

              -  Data and Tools 
              -  Publications                  -  Treesearch 
                -  Understory 
                -  National Forest Service Library 
              -  Multimedia 

# Lake Tahoe watershed assessment: volume II.

| Authors: | Dennis D. Murphy, Christopher M. Knopp                                                                                           |
|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Year:    | 2000                                                                                                                             |
| Type:    | General Technical Report                                                                                                         |
| Station: | Pacific Southwest Research Station                                                                                               |
| DOI:     | https://doi.org/10.2737/PSW-GTR-176                                                                                              |
| Source:  | Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-176. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture; 753 p |

Download (PDF 4.0 MB)

Cite

## Abstract

Volume I (PSW-GTR-175)

## Citation

☓
# C_2015381EN.01004301.xml

| 16.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 381/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 381/43

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 1 September 2015 — Alcimos Consulting v ECB

(Case T-368/15 R)

((Application for interim measures - Economic and monetary policy - Decisions adopted by the Governing Council of the ECB - Provision of emergency liquidity assistance to Greek banks - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Breach of procedural requirements - Inadmissibility))

(2015/C 381/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Alcimos Consulting SMPC (Athens, Greece) (represented by: F. Rodolaki, avocat)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Central Bank (ECB)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for suspension of operation of the decisions of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank of 28 June and 6 July 2015 concerning the level of emergency liquidity assistance provided to Greek banks.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
Note:ThefollowingMOVES2014FuelsinputparametersandRVPadjustmentsweredevelopedwiththeassistanceoftheUSOfficeofTransportationAirQuality(OTAQ)fortheShelbyCountyOzoneRedesignationRequestandMaintenancePlan.IC:ll.ll<;>1.lvt>JVI"T0U<;>IVUPJ-''f.fuelfuelmonthfuelmarketmarketRegioniDYeariDGroupiDFormulationiDShareShareCV2780000002017734790.9651150.52780000002017734810.0348850.52780000002020738660.9415510.5,2780000002020738680.05844850.52780000002027747690.8527820.5__27800QQO_O2027747710.1472180.5Table2:MOVES2014FuelFormulationfuelfueiSubRVPsulfurETOHMTBEETBETAMEaromaticolefinbenzenee200e300BioDieselCetanePAHT50FormulationtOtypeiDLevelVolumeVolume VolumeVolumeContentContent ContentEsterVolumeIndexContent34791210101000023.46.670.6351.176282.8291000197.4163481159101500022.065.490.6357.266983.3505000184.98638661210101000023.46.670.6351.176282.8291000197.4163868159101500022.065.490.6357.266983.3505000184.98647691210101000023.46.670.6351.176282.8291000197.4164771159101500022065.490.6357.266983.3505000184.986IQUI\:>-'·lVI.._,V..............I"'I'I.....,V<>Q\:>IIQ...\IVIIcountyiDfuelmodelsourcefueiSupplyusageYeariDYearBinFuelFueiTvnelFraction471572017011 1471572020011 1471572027011 1T90330.186327.816330.186327.816330.186327.816
#### Durgin *versus*Baker.

In a contract of service, at stipulated wages, for a specified time, “ if the parties can agree,” either party may terminate it at pleasure, and without showing that there was any reasonable cause of disagreement.

Assumpsit on account annexed, and *quantum meruit*for two months labor. The contract was, that the plaintiff *“*should labor for the defendant six months at $13 per month, *if they could*agree.” The plaintiff worked two months and then quit. For that labor, this suit is brought. It was tried in the District Court, Hailaway, J.

The Judge was requested by the defendant to instruct the jury, that the plaintiff could not recover, without showing that he had reasonable cause for disagreement. That instruction was not given. Yerdict for plaintiff. Exceptions by defendant.

*C. J. Abbott,*for defendant.

Where a contract is made for service for a stated term, if the hired leave before the term expires, without good cause, no wages can be recovered. *Stark*v. *Parker,*2 Pick. 267 : *Thayer*v. *Wadsworth,*19 Pick. 349 ; *Olmstead*v. *Beal, ibid.*528.

*274A contract for a definite term, if the parties can agree, does not differ substantially from the contract in the authorities cited.

In this contract, it is apparent, that the defendant intended to secure the services of the plaintiff for six months ; and that the plaintiff was willing to become bound for that term, under *some*circumstances at least.

The words “ if they could agree,” are not to have such force given them, as to destroy the *important*clause, “ for six months.”

If disagreement had arisen from the fault of the plaintiff, would he have been justified in leaving? To justify the plaintiff, under such a contract, in leaving before the end of the term, there must have been reasonable cause for leaving.

But if the words “ if they can agree,” do modify the contract, and render it distinguishable from the cases in Pickering, still they are to receive such a construction, as to carry out the intention of the parties.

*Tuck, for*plaintiff.

Howard, J.,

orally.—The contract reserves to each of the parties the largest liberty.. Neither could control the other. Either might terminate the contract at pleasure. It was not .requisite that he should have a reason for it. He cannot, therefore, be required to prove one.

*Exceptions overruled.*
No. 62077.

#### Allied French Furs, Inc., and William H. Emig et al. *v.*United States,

protests 148253-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of kidskins the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Joseph Rotberg & Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(40 Cust. Ct. 22, C. D. 1952), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.
No. 53741.

protests 135631-K and 122257-K (St. Louis).

#### Denebeim Distilling Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
**Exhibit 31.4**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Michael Trimarchi, certify that:

 

1.                           I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 (this “**Report**”) of CommerceHub, Inc.; and

 

2.                           Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this Report.

 
|                                               |   |                                                              |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:    April 27,   2018 | By:    | /s/ MICHAEL   TRIMARCHI                                           |
|                                               |   | Michael   Trimarchi                                               |
|                                               |   | Chief Financial   Officer, Chief Commercial Officer and Treasurer |
|                                               |   | (Principal   Financial and Accounting Officer)                    |

 

----
1

In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-349V

Filed: December 29, 2016

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * UNPUBLISHED

CANDACE L. HOLMES, *

* Special Master Hamtilon-Fieldman

Petitioner, *

*

v. * Joint Stipulation of Dismissal; 

* Vaccine Rule 21(a); No Judgment; 

* Order Concluding Proceedings

 *

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

 *

 Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Nancy R. Meyers, Ward Black Law, Greensboro, NC, for Petitioner.

Claudia Gangi, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

ORDER CONCLUDING PROCEEDINGS1

On March 17, 2016, Candace L. Holmes (“Petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation 

under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-1 to -34 (2012). 

Petitioner alleged that the administration of a trivalent influenza (“flu”) vaccine on January 14, 

2015 caused her to develop pseudotumor cerebri. Pet. at 1-2, ECF No. 1.

On December 23, 2016, Petitioner and Respondent submitted a joint Stipulation of 

Dismissal. Stip., ECF No. 23. Accordingly, pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21 (a) the above-captioned 

 

1

 Because this unpublished Order contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in 

accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal 

Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine 

Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, 

the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, 

the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will 

redact such material from public access.
2

case is hereby dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is hereby instructed that a 

judgment shall not enter in the instant case pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman

 Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman

Special Master
No. 53215.

#### Castlecliff, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 141343-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1995, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                          84,817
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  532,091
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (40,135)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,233,224
<PP&E>                                         590,958
<DEPRECIATION>                                (259,449)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,139,337
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          743,643
<BONDS>                                      2,337,710
<COMMON>                                        12,892
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    260,438
<OTHER-SE>                                     149,129
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,139,337
<SALES>                                      2,514,782
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,514,782
<CGS>                                        1,533,507
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,235,097
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                14,284
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             140,632
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                139,053
<INCOME-TAX>                                    55,607
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             83,446
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    83,446
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>
No. 39055.

#### Petition 5634-R of Marshall Field & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

From the evidence it was clear that there was no intention on the part of the petitioner to defraud the revenue of the United States or •to conceal or misrepresent the facts. The petition was therefore granted.
In the Senate of the United States,

July 11, 2008.

Resolved, That the resolution from the House of Representatives (H. Con. Res. 236) entitled ‘‘Concurrent resolution recognizing the close relationship between the United

States and the Republic of San Marino.’’, do pass with the

following

AMENDMENT:

In the tenth whereas clause of the preamble, strike out øearlier this year¿ and insert: in 2007

Attest:

Secretary.
110TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 236

AMENDMENT
# C_2016251EN.01002601.xml

| 11.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 251/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 251/26

---

Judgment of the General Court of 1 June 2016 — Wolf Oil v EUIPO — SCT Lubricants (CHEMPIOIL)

(Case T-34/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark CHEMPIOIL - Earlier figurative mark CHAMPION - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Examination of the facts of the Office’s own motion - Obligation to state reasons - Rights of the defence - Articles 75 and 76 of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 251/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Wolf Oil Corp. (Hemiksem, Belgium) (represented by: P. Maeyaert and J. Muyldermans, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: UAB SCT Lubricants (Klaipėda, Lithuania) (represented by: S. Labesius, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 October 2014 (Case R 1596/2013-5), concerning opposition proceedings between Wolf Oil Corp. and UAB SCT Lubricants.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Wolf Oil Corp. to pay the costs, including those incurred by UAB SCT Lubricants for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Wolf Oil Corp. to pay the costs, including those incurred by UAB SCT Lubricants for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

---

(1)  OJ C 89, 16.3.2015.

1

---
# C_2016145EN.01001302.xml

| 25.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 145/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 145/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy we Wrocławiu (Poland) lodged on 1 July 2015 — Z.Ś., Z.M., M.P. v X w G.

(Case C-325/15)

(2016/C 145/16)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy we Wrocławiu

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Z.Ś., Z.M., M.P.

Applicants:

Defendant: X w G.

Defendant:

The Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) made an order on 18 February 2016 in which it answered the first question submitted for a preliminary ruling by the referring court. The second question was found to be manifestly inadmissible.

---
# C_2017063EN.01002602.xml

| 27.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/26

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2017 — Stock Polska v EUIPO — Lass & Steffen (LUBELSKA)

(Case T-701/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark LUBELSKA - Earlier national word mark Lubeca - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Level of attention of the public - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 063/36)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Stock Polska sp. z o.o. (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: T. Gawrylczyk, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Rajh, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Lass & Steffen GmbH Wein- und Spirituosen-Import (Lübeck, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunz-Hallstein, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 September 2015 (Case R 1788/2014-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Lass & Steffen Wein- und Spirituosen-Import and Stock Polska.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Stock Polska sp. z o.o. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Stock Polska sp. z o.o. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 38, 1.2.2016.

1

---
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - Order No. 1510

Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

*Whereas*, the New London Foreign Trade Zone Commission, grantee of FTZ 208, has requested authority on behalf of Pfizer Inc (Pfizer) to expand the subzone and scope of manufacturing authority at Subzone 208A at the Pfizer pharmaceutical manufacturing plant in Groton, Connecticut (FTZ Docket 31-2006, filed 7/20/06);                

*Whereas*, notice inviting public comment has been given in the                     **Federal Register**                     (71 FR 43107, 7/31/06); and,                

*Whereas*, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the application is in the public interest;                

*Now, therefore*, the Board hereby approves the expansion of the subzone and the scope of authority under zone procedures within Subzone 208A for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products at the Pfizer Inc plant located in Groton, Connecticut, as described in the application and the                     **Federal Register**                     notice, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28.                

Signed at Washington, DC, this 10th day of April 2007.

David M. Spooner,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce For Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

Attest:

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. E7-7596 Filed 4-19-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S