alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016364EN.01003101.xml

| 3.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 364/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 364/31

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 19 July 2016 — Opreana v Commission

(Case F-67/15) (1)

((Civil service - Temporary member of staff - Temporary member of staff occupying a permanent position - Non-renewal of a fixed-term contract - Pregnancy - Act adversely affecting a member of staff - Lack of competence of the author of an act adversely affecting a member of staff - Right to be heard - Duty to have regard to the welfare of staff))

(2016/C 364/35)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Luisa Opreana (Arlon, Belgium) (represented by: initially by A. Salerno, lawyer, and subsequently by A. Salerno and P. Singer, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Berscheid and F. Simonetti, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision not to extend the applicant’s contract beyond its termination date, although she was coming to the end of her pregnancy.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Annuls the European Commission’s decision not to renew Ms Luisa Opreana’s temporary staff contract, which came to an end on 31 August 2014; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the European Commission’s decision not to renew Ms Luisa Opreana’s temporary staff contract, which came to an end on 31 August 2014;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Ms Opreana. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Ms Opreana.

---

(1)  OJ C 213, 29/6/2015, p. 50.

---
#### Kenneth L. WOODWORTH, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, Respondent.

No. 05-3118.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Aug. 26, 2005.

NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

*ORDER*

The Department of the Navy moves without opposition to remand this case to the Merit Systems Protection Board for further consideration.

The Navy asserts “that the MSPB may have failed to distinguish between two different personnel actions” and, thus, Kenneth L. Woodworth may be entitled to further consideration of some of his allegations before the MSPB.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion to remand is granted.
No. 48734.

#### Petition 6344-R of M. A. Hoenecke (Minneapolis).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

At the hearing the case was submitted on the uncontradicted testimony of the petitioner, a customs broker with 16 years’ experience, who made the entry in question. From consideration of the record and the attitude of the petitioner throughout the entire period from the time entry was first filed until final appraisement, the court found that it reflected a diligent effort on the part of the petitioner to comply with the requirements of the law and stated it had no hesitancy in holding that the entry was without any intention to defraud the revenue, or to conceal or misrepresent the facts. The petition was therefore granted.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                               2
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       41
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        837
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   891
<PP&E>                                            9727
<DEPRECIATION>                                    7056
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    3562
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             2221
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           361
<OTHER-SE>                                         935
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      3562
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                               29
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       29
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   125
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (154)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (154)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (154)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.004)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.004)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 35.1**

 

**Servicer Compliance Statement of John Deere Capital Corporation**

 

I, Steven N. Owenson, Senior Vice President and Controller of John Deere Capital Corporation, state:

 

A review of John Deere Capital Corporation’s activities for the period from October 31, 2016 through October 29, 2017 (the “Reporting Period”) and of John Deere Capital Corporation’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of March 2, 2016 among John Deere Capital Corporation, John Deere Receivables, Inc. and John Deere Owner Trust 2016 has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge based on such review, John Deere Capital Corporation has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

 
| Date: January 12,   2018 | John Deere Capital   Corporation |
|-------------------------------|----------------------------------|
|                          |                             |
|                          |                             |
|                          |                             |
|                          | By                               | */s/ Steven N. Owenson* |   |
|                          |                             | Steven N. Owenson |
|                          |                             | Senior Vice President   and Controller |

 

----
No. 46953.

#### Protests 35666-K, etc., of Gimbel Bros., Inc., et al. (New York).

*468Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The evidence established that certain items of the involved merchandise consist of woven silk mufflers, hemmed, imported prior to the effective date of the trade agreement with the United Kingdom; other items consist of woven silk mufflers, not hand-blocked, not hemmed, imported after the effective date of the said trade agreement; other items consist of woven silk mufflers, hemmed and not block-printed by hand, imported after the effective date of the said trade agreement; other items consist of silk handkerchiefs, hemmed, imported prior to the effective date of said trade agreement; and other items consist of silk handkerchiefs, hemmed, imported after the effective date of said trade agreement. In accordance therewith the merchandise specified in schedules A, B, and F was held dutiable at 60 percent under paragraph 1209; the items specified in schedule D were held dutiable at 30 percent under paragraph 1209 and T. D. 49753; items specified in schedule E were held dutiable at 35 percent under paragraph 1209 and T. D. 49753; and certain merchandise specified in schedule G was held dutiable at 45 percent under paragraph 1209 and T. D„ 49753. Protests sustained in part.
(Reap. Dec. 8401)

Entry No. 768182.

#### American Express Company *v.*United States

(Decided March 4, 1955)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.'

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General *(Daniel I. Auster,*trial attorney), for the defendant,

*467Lawrence, Judge:

There was no appearance on behalf of the appealing party when the above-enumerated appeal for a reappraisement was called for hearing.

Rule 5 of the rules of this court provides that—

> * * * Where the plaintiff, petitioner, or appellant, or his attorney, in a case does not appear when the same is called, and after the opposite party has had opportunity to present evidence on the issues, it shall be deemed submitted and shall be decided by the court on the record as it appears therein.

In conformity with the requirements of the rule, I have examined the record in the appeal before the court and find nothing therein which tends in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness which attaches to the decision of the appraiser. I find and hold, therefore, that the proper values of the merchandise are the values returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly. .
|  EXHIBIT 32.2                                     |
|--------------------------------------------------------|
|  Union Carbide Corporation and Subsidiaries  |

| 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Corporation for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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 Corporation. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ EUDIO GIL                                                 |   |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
| Eudio GilVice President, Treasurer andChief Financial Officer |   |   |
| Date: November 3, 2010                                        |   |   |

----
#### United States *v.*L. P. Siebold, Inc.

No. 6032.

Invoice dated Neuville-on-Ferrain, France, November 10, 1939.

Certified November 14, 1939.

Entered at Washington, D. C., January 10, 1940.

Entry No. W-605.

(Decided June 22, 1944)

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Richard E. FitzGibbon,*special attorney), for the plaintiff.

*Tompkins & Tompkins*for the defendant.

OliyeR, Presiding Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement involves the valuation of a shipment of rugs from France. The merchandise was invoiced at various prices per each rug in French francs, and was entered at $2.80 per sq. meter, United States currency. Appraisement was based on the entered value. The merchandise was shipped from France during November 1939 pursuant to orders for the same dated April 20 and August 31, 1939.

The only evidence introduced herein is plaintiff’s collective exhibit 1, a certified copy of report of William A. Conkright, acting supervising Treasury attaché, which establishes that the relationship between the importer and exporter was that of buyer and seller; that the manufacturer is free to sell to all American purchasers; that the manufacturer issues no price lists, prices being fixed by negotiations in each instance; that the goods are produced only after receipt of the order; and that “effective with an order dated October 17,1939, * * *, the price was increased to $3.10 per sq. meter.”

In regard to the foreign value the report shows that no such or similar merchandise was sold in France.

The case of *White Lamb Finlay, Inc.*v. *United States,*29 C. C. P. A. 199, C. A. D. 192, is controlling herein. In that case the court held that where the market value changes between the date of purchase and the date of exportation in the case of goods not carried in stock but freely offered for sale to all purchasers for future delivery, the market value on or about the latter date must be taken for appraisement purposes.

I therefore find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination'of the value of the involved merchandise, and that such value was $3.10 per sq. meter, United States currency.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than May 18, 2007.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis**                     (Glenda Wilson, Community Affairs Officer) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:                

*1. Wilson-Gardner Family Control Group*, Jackson, Mississippi, which consists of Alice King Harrison, Forrest City, Arkansas; Fred Gillaspy Wilson, Jackson, Mississippi; John Frederick Wilson, Jackson, Mississippi; Margaret Gardner Wilson, Ridgeland, Mississippi; Margaret Wilson Ethridge, Madison, Mississippi; Ermis King Wilson, Sterlington, Louisiana; Edna Earl Douglas, Memphis, Tennessee; Alison Wilson Page, Sterlington, Louisiana; and Ermis M. Wilson, Sterlington, Louisiana; to retain control of Commerce Bancorp, Inc., and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of Bank of Commerce, both of Greenwood, Mississippi.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, April 30, 2007.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. E7-8481 Filed 5-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
Before the Third Division,

September 2, 1943

No. 48708.

#### Protests 65926-K, etc., of American President Lines, Inc. (Honolulu, etc.).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial counsel for the Government moved to dismiss the protests because of lack of jurisdiction on the part of the court. In view of the decision in *Waterman Steamship Corp.*v. *United States*(30 C. C. P. A. 119, C. A. D. 223) the court granted the Government’s motion to dismiss.
EXHIBIT 32.2
                                                                    ------------


                         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 March 31, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Lester A. Aaron, Chief Financial 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/  Lester A. Aaron
                    --------------------
           Name:    Lester A. Aaron
           Title:   Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
           Date:    May 13, 2004




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.
(Reap. Dec. 9590)

#### F. W. Woolworth Company *v.*United States and United States *v.*F. W. Woolworth Company

Entry No. 845393/5.

(Decided February 11, 1960)

*Sharretts, Paley & Carter*for the Importer.

*George Coehran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the United States.

*565Oliver, Chief Judge:

Counsel for the respective parties have submitted this appeal for reappraisement for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that at the time of the exportation of the plastic accident cars such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, plus, when not included in such price, the cost of containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, at $67.60 per 100 pieces, less 50%, packed.

> IT IS EURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher foreign value for the merchandise herein at the time of exportation.

On the agreed facts, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the plastic accident cars in question is export value, as defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, and hold that such statutory value therefor is $67.60 per 100 pieces, less 50 per centum, packed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Certification Pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

                  Pursuant  to  section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002
            (subsection  (a) and (b) of  section  1350,  chapter 63 of title 18,
            United  States  Code),  each of the  undersigned  officers  of Canal
            Capital  Corporation and Subsidiaries,  a Delaware  corporation (the
            "Company"), does hereby certify that:

            The Quarterly Report of Form 10-Q for the six months ended April 30,
            2009  (the  "Form  10-Q") of the  Company  fully  complies  with the
            requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange
            Act of 1934  and  information  contained  in the  Form  10-Q  fairly
            presents,  in all material  respects,  the  financial  condition and
            results of operations of the Company.


Date: June 11, 2009                    /S/ Michael E. Schultz
                                       -----------------------
                                       Chief Executive Officer


Date: June 11, 2009                    /S/ Reginald Schauder
                                       -----------------------
                                       Chief Financial Officer


                                       48
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 239 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 239

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           September 27 (legislative day, September 17), 2008

                                Received

            October 2 (legislative day, September 17), 2008

  Referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Recognizing and acknowledging the important role of adoption, and 
 commending all parties involved, including birthparents who carry out 
       an adoption plan, adoptive families, and adopted children.

Whereas in 2002, there were 22,291 domestic infant adoptions in the United 
        States;
Whereas birthparents who decide to carry out an adoption plan come from all 
        walks of life, with various backgrounds and socioeconomic status;
Whereas birthparents who carry out an adoption plan should be recognized and 
        commended for doing what they believe is in the best interest of their 
        child;
Whereas loving, nurturing adoptive families make it possible for birthparents to 
        carry out an adoption plan;
Whereas adoptive families make an important difference in the life of a child 
        through adoption and show the compassionate spirit of our Nation;
Whereas adoptive families should be recognized and commended for providing a 
        permanent, safe, and loving home for a child;
Whereas studies have shown that adopted children form deep emotional bonds with 
        their adoptive parents indistinguishable from those biological children 
        form with their parents;
Whereas adopted children grow up to make valuable contributions to our Nation 
        and lead fulfilling lives;
Whereas adopted children should be recognized and commended for understanding 
        that the choice of the birthparents to carry out an adoption plan may be 
        a difficult and carefully considered decision made out of love for a 
        child; and
Whereas Congress should do more to support adoption, including birthparents who 
        carry out an adoption plan, adoptive families, and adopted children: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That Congress recognizes and acknowledges the important role of 
adoption, and commends all parties involved, including birthparents who 
carry out an adoption plan, adoptive families, and adopted children.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 26, 2008.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```