alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016364EN.01005701.xml

| 3.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 364/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 364/57

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 18 July 2016 — Dietrich v Parliament

(Case F-143/15) (1)

((Civil service - Contract staff - Early termination of the contract - Expiry date of the notice period - Suspension of the notice period - New expiry date of the notice period - Act not having an adverse effect - Complaint lodged out of time - Plea of inadmissibility - Manifest inadmissibility - Article 83 of the Rules of Procedure))

(2016/C 364/74)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Constant Dietrich (Pfulgriesheim, France) (represented by: A. Fombaron, lawyer)

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: L. Deneys and E. Taneva, Agents)

Subject-matter of the case

Action for annulment of the decision rejecting the applicant’s complaint seeking annulment of the decision terminating early his employment at the European Parliament.

Operative part of the order

| 1) | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1)

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2) | Constant Dietrich shall bear his own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Constant Dietrich shall bear his own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by the European Parliament.

---

(1)  OJ C 68, 22.2.2016, p. 45.

---
**EXHIBIT      32**

**Section      1350 Certifications**

|                                          |                                                     |                                     |
|-----------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
| Dated:                 November 14, 2005 | By:                                            | /s/ Douglas                N. Dixon |
|                                          |                                                          |
|                                          | Douglas                N. Dixon, Chief Executive Officer |

|                                          |                                                  |                                  |
|-----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                                          |                                                  |                                  |
| Dated:                 November 14, 2005 | By:                                         | /s/ G.                Dennis Key |
|                                          |                                                       |
|                                          | G.                Dennis Key, Chief Financial Officer |

----
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, DC

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

### PSA AIRLINES, INC.

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



### NOTICE OF REGISTRATION OF TRADE NAME

On November 27, 2013

, the Department authorized PSA Airlines, Inc. (“PSA”)

, a U.S

. certificated air carrier, 1 the use of the trade name “American Eagle” for one year from the

effective date of the merger between America n Airlines, Inc., and US Airways, Inc. The

Department limited the effectiveness of the authorization in light of the fact that the trade name

American Eagle, was used by American Eagle Airlines , Inc., as well as other U.S. air carriers.

On October 1, 2014, American Airlines, Inc. (“American”)

, requested that the Department issue

a new notice without the limiting condition. In support of its request, American states that

American Eagle Airlines, Inc., has subsequently changed its corporate name to Envoy Air Inc.,

and thus the potential for public confusion no longer exi s ts. 2

By this notice

, the Department removes the aforementioned limitation placed on PSA and

acknowledges the continued use of the trade name “American Eagle” in its operations

.

Dated at Washington, D.C.

, October 29 , 201 4

.

TODD M. HOMAN

Director

Office of Aviation Analysis

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at:

http:// www.regulations.gov

1 PSA ’s i nterstate certificate was last re issued by Order 2004

- 3

- 32 , issued March 29, 2004.

2 See Order 2014

- 4

- 13, issued April 15, 2014.Attachment A

SE RVICE LIST FOR MESA AIRLINES, INC.

MR ROBERT E COHN

MR PATRICK R RIZZI

COUNSEL FOR MESA AIRLINES, INC

HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP

COLUMBIA SQUARE

555 THIRTEENTH STREET NW

WASHINGTON DC 20004 OFFICE OF AIRLINE INFORMATION

DOT/RSPA/BTS E

- 36

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SE

WASHINGTON DC 20590

MR STEVEN D. D’URSO

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION MR MARK MAZOR

CERTIFICATION MANAGE R

FAA AFS

- 900

45005 AVIATION DRIVE SUITE 131

DULLES VA 20166

MR ALEC BRAMLETT

MANAGING DIRECTOR

LEGAL AND GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS

AMERICAN AIRLINES INC MR PETER LYNCH

ASST CHIEF COUNSEL FOR E NFORCEMENT

FAA / AGC

- 300

800 INDEPENDENCE AVE SW

WASHINGTON DC 20591
### ...^^JVLD PRE-PINAL INSPECTIO N REPOR T - • ' ^ V J JACKSONVILLE MUNICIPAL LANDFILL SUPERTUND ai-TB - . ^

Loanoke County, Arkansa s • ? M VD ^ ' H 2: 3 0

an d '^JICC-.;-(-,!-::
- ;-,- , ,. , •.,-., - ROGERS ROAD MUNICIPAL LANOriLL 8UPERFUND fftT E - ^.-..l, .

Pulask i County, Arkansa s prepare d b

yKathleen Aislin

g O n Septembe r 20 , 1995 , representative s o f th e Environmenta l Protectio

n Agenc y(EPA) , th

e Arkansa s Departmen t o f Pollutio n Contro l an

d Ecolog y(ADPC&E) , an

d th e Cit yo f Jacksonvill e inspecte d th e Jacksonvill e an

d Roger s Road Municipa l Landfill s i n orde r t o asses s whethe r o r no t constructio n (as defined b

yEPA) wa s complet e a t th

e sites . As detailed i n th

e Januar y20 , 1995 , Technica l Assistanc e Report s for th

e tw o landfills , th

e EP Aportio n o f th e wor k a t th e sit e wa s completed i n Decembe r 1994 . Unde r th e June 20 , 1994 , Consen t Decree s (CDs ) fo r th e sites , EP

Aperformed th

e wor k tha t involved handlin

g th e hazardou s substance s an d th e Cit yperforme d th e non-hazardou s work . Th e cit yperformed it s portio n o f th e work, whic h included regradin g an d revegetating , fro

mAugus t 199 4 throug h Septembe r 1995 . Th

e purpos e o f th

e inspectio

n wa s t o ensur e tha t thes e activitie s wer e complet e an d tha t n o furthe r EP Aactio n wa s necessary . Th e site s had a ver

yheav yrai n th

e da ybefor e th

e inspectio n whic h mad e the condition s idea l for determinatio n o f positiv e drainage . N o area s o f standin g wate r wer e observe

d a t th e site . Newl ymulche d an d seeded area s wer e als o visible . The sit e fencin

g wa s i n excellen t conditio n an d a ne w entranc e t o th

e Jacksonvill e Landfil l ha d bee n constructe d an d secured . Th

e housekeepin

g a t the site s wa s ver ygood an

d al l area s tha t provide d acces s wer e freshlymowed. Constructio n completion a t th e site s i s deeme d successful . Punc hLis t o f Sit e Closeou t Activities

• Empt ydrums o f clea n purg e wate r tha t wer e collecte d durin g groun d wate r sampling . • Inspec t sit e afte r heav yrai n fo r standin

g wate r an

d fil l i n an ylo w spots . • Inspec t revegetated are a t o mak e sur e tha t th

e revegetatio

n i s successful . • Continue t o monito r sit e drainag e ditche s fo r cloggin g material .Th

e Remedia l Actio n (RA ) wa s satisfactor yimplemented an

d completed consisten

t wit h the Recor

d o f Decisions fo r th

e site s an d th e R Awor k plans. Long-ter

moperatio

n an d maintenanc e activitie s wil l includ e groun d wate r samplin

g for a t leas t fou

r mor e year s (one year o f th e 5-yea r samplin

g wa s conducte

d i n Octobe r 1994 ) an

d fenc e maintenance . Inspection Participants: Kathlee n Aisling , Remedia l Projec t Manage r EP A Ke n dark, On-scene Coordinato r EP A Duane Reel, Jacksonvill e Cit yEnginee r Cit y Devo n Hobby, Supervisor yProjec t Manage r ADPC& E

2
<PAGE>

                             [LETTERHEAD OF KPMG]


AUDITORS' REPORT

To the Board of Directors of Cineplex Odeon Corporation

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-
52453) on Form S-8 of Loews Cineplex Entertainment Corporation pertaining to the
Loews Cineplex Entertainment Corporation 1997 Stock Incentive Plan of our report
dated February 13, 1998, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Cineplex
Odeon Corporation as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related consolidated
statements of income, changes in shareholders' equity and changes in cash
resources for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
1997, which is incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10K of
Loews Cineplex Entertainment Corporation for the year ended February 28, 1999.


/s/ KPMG LLP
Chartered Accountants

Toronto, Canada

May 20, 1999
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, to which
this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Douglas ValentiDouglas ValentiChairman and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
Date: November 10, 2010
Case No. 14,688.

#### UNITED STATES v. BURCH.

[1 Cranch. C. C. 36.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

July Term, 1801.

Disorderly House — Indictment — Time Laid— Former Conviction.

1. The time laid in the indictment for keeping a disorderly bouse is not material.

2. A convictici. is a bar to prosecution for all the time previous to the conviction.

Indictment for keeping a disorderly house.

THE COURT

was of opinion that the time is not material if before the indictment found. The keeping of a disorderly house is a single offence, and one conviction is a bar to a prosecution for keeping a disorderly house at any time prior to the finding of the indictment
No. 6429.

#### STATE OF LOUISIANA vs. H. F. BENNETT.

Syllabus.

One who under the color of sale and resale, or otherwise, lends money upon deposit of corporeal property, with sufficient frequency, at such rates of interest, and to such a class of borrowers, as shows that the loans are made as a strict matter of business, and not occasionally, or as a mere friendly accommodation to the borrower, is a “pawn-broker” within the meaning of the revenue license law.

Appeal from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, Division “D,” No. 110,421. Honorable Porter Parker, Judge.

W. W. Westerfield, for plaintiff and appellee.

Jos. A. 'Casey, for defendant and appellant.

His Honor, JOHN ST. PAUL,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:

The defendant is sued for a pawn-broker’s license for the years 1912,1913 and 1914.

It is abundantly shown that during the years 1913 and 1914, under color of sale and re-sale, he lent .money upon deposit of corporeal property with sufficient frequency, at such rates of interest, and to á class of borrowers, as shows that he made the loans as a strict matter of business and not simply occasionally, or .as a mere friendly accommodation to the borrower.

This, in our opinion, is being engaged in the business of “pawn broker” within the meaning of the revenue license law.

There is no evidence in the record that defendant was engaged in .that business during the year 1912, and his *415sworn denial that he was so engaged during that year must stand.

Opinion and decree, June 30th, 1915.

Rehearing refused, July 22nd, 1915.

The judgment appealed from is therefore amended by striking therefrom so. much ias condemns the defendant for a license for the year 1912 (nineteen hundred and twelve) and as thus amended the judgment is affirmed.
### District Permitted Solid Fuel-Fired Boilers

Size MMBtu/hr Type Existing NOx Control Technology Actual Permit NOx Limit Fuel Type

259 Circulating

fluidized bed SNCR 27.2 lb/hr ( ≈ 0.103 lb/MMBtu) ( ≈ 80 ppmv @3% O 2 ) Biomass

317 Fluidized bed SNCR 27.8 lb/hr ( ≈ 0.106 lb/MMBtu) ( ≈ 83 ppmv @ 3% O 2 ) Biomass

460 Fluidized bed SNCR 50 lb/hr ( ≈ 0.189 lb/MMBtu) ( ≈ 146 ppmv @ 3% O 2 ) Biomass and urban wood waste

352 Circulating

fluidized bed SNCR 0.08 lb/MMBtu ( ≈ 62 ppmv @ 3%O 2 ) Biomass, construction wood waste, and urban wood waste 6.7

Not subject to

rule because emissions are less than 10 tpy NOx. Combustion Control 2.6 lb/ton or 25.3 lb/day; fired on sawdust/pumace 0.7 lb/ton or 6.3 lb/day fired on walnut or pistachio shells Sawdust, pumace, walnut, pistachio shells

9 Combustion Control 2.6 lb/ton or 25.3 lb/day fired on sawdust/pumace 0.7 lb/ton or 6.3 lb/day fired on walnut or pistachio shells Sawdust, pumace, walnut, pistachio shells

11.5 MW Traveling grate FGR and SNCR 0.09 lb/MMBtu ( ≈ 69.9ppmv@3%O2) Biomass, construction wood waste, and urban wood waste 400 Bubbling

fluidized bed SNCR 0.1 lb/MMBtu ( ≈ 77.6 ppmv@3%O2) Biomass, construction wood waste, and urban wood waste 315 SNCR 0.1 lb/MMBtu ( ≈ 77.6 ppmv@3%O) Biomass, construction wood waste, and urban wood waste 171.2 Wellons

combustion cyclo blast furnace Low NOx burner

with FGR and SCR 84 ppmv@3%O2 ( ≈ 0.108

lb/MMBtu) Biomass and construction wood waste

178 Circulating

fluidized bed SNCR 49.4 ppmv@3%O 2 ( ≈ 0.067 lb/MMBtu) Coal, fluid coke, delayed coke, or tire derived fuel 280 Circulating

fluidized bed SNCR 0.04 Lb/MMBtu @24-hr average ( ≈ 29.3 ppmv @3%O 2 ) Coal, fluid coke, delayed coke, or tire derived fuel

49.9 MW Circulating

fluidized bed Low-Temperature

Staged Combustion with SNCR 0.2 lb/MMBtu

( ≈ 146.7 ppmv @3%O 2 ) Coal, petroleum coke, or tire derived fuel

36 MW (389 MMBtu/hr) Circulating bed

combustor Low-Temperature

Staged Combustion with SNCR 0.1 lb/MMBtu

( ≈ 73.4 ppmv @3%O 2 ) Coal or petroleum coke

36 MW (389 MMBtu/hr)) Circulating bed

combustor Low-Temperature

Staged Combustion with SNCR 0.1 lb/MMBtu

( ≈ 73.4 ppmv @3%O 2 ) Coal or petroleum coke

30 MW (320 MMBtu/hr) Fluidized bed SNCR 28 ppmv @3-hr period ( ≈ 0.038 lb/MMBtu) Petroleum coke

173.3 Stokerspreader SNCR 200 ppmv@12%CO 2 ( ≈ 0.35 lb/MMBtu @ 3% O 2 ) Municipal Solid Waste

173.3 SNCR 200 ppmv@12%CO 2 ( ≈ 0.35 lb/MMBtu @ 3% O 2 ) Municipal Solid Waste
(Reap. Dec. 9635)

#### Cohn Hall Marx Co., Division of United Merchants & Manufacturers, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 841321/2; 841321/1.

(Decided March 18, 1960)

*John D. Rode*for the plaintiff.

*George Ooehran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Ford, Judge:

The two appeals for reappraisement, listed above, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that the issues in the appeals to reappraisement noted above are the same in all material respects as the issues' in the ease of *United States*v. *S. Shamash & Sons Inc.,*A.R.D. 41, and that the record in said case may be incorporated herein.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the market value or the price at the time of exportation to the United States of the pongee silk involved herein at which 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, including the cost of all 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 was 750 per yard, packed, and that the price for home consumption was no higher.

> *615IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the eases may be deemed submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact, I find and hold 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 merchandise here involved, and that such statutory value is 75 cents per yard, packed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 90 (Thursday, May 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 26617]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8982]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP07-437-000]

Kern River Gas Transmission Company; Notice of Proposed Changes 
in FERC Gas Tariff

May 4, 2007.
    Take notice that on May 1, 2007, Kern River Gas Transmission 
Company (Kern River) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed on 
Appendix A to the filing, to be effective June 1, 2007.
    Kern River states that it has served a copy of this filing upon its 
customers and interested state regulatory commissions.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Sec.  154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone 
filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on 
the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before 
the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or 
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
[email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-8982 Filed 5-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
### F I LE D U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E LEVE NTH CI RCUI T Januar y 25, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN C L E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 13318 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D o c k e tN o . 0 4 - 8 0 1 6 3 - C R - D MM U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s A N T H O N Y B O A T W R I G H T , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( Jan u ar y 25, 2006) B efo re T JO F L A T , B L A C K an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: D a vi d J . J of

f e , appoi nt e d c ouns e l f

orA nthony B oa tw r i ght , ha s f i l e d a2

m ot i on t o w i thdr a w on appe a l s uppor t e d by abr i e f pr e pa r e d pur s ua ntt o A nde r s v. C a l i f orni a , 386 U . S . 738, 87 S . C t . 1396, 18 L . E d. 2d 493 ( 1967) . O uri nde pe nde nt r e vi e w of

the r e c or d r e ve a l s tha tc ouns e l ’ s a s s e s s m e ntof the r e l a t i ve m e r i tof

the appe a l i s c orr e c t . B e c a us e i nde pe nde nte xa m i na t i on of the e nt i r e r e c or d r e ve a l s no arg u ab l e i ssu es o f m eri t , co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , a nd G ordo n’ s c on vi ct i on s a nd se nt ence s a re AF F I RME D.
# C_2016392EN.01003501.xml

| 24.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 14 September 2016 — National Iranian Tanker Company v Council

(Case T-207/15) (1)

1

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures adopted against Iran with the aim of preventing nuclear proliferation - Freezing of funds - Res judicata - Right to an effective remedy - Error of assessment - Rights of the defence - Right to property - Proportionality))

(2016/C 392/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: National Iranian Tanker Company (Tehran, Iran) (represented by: T. de la Mare QC, M. Lester, J. Pobjoy, Barristers, R. Chandrasekera, S. Ashley and C. Murphy, Solicitors)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented initially by N. Rouam and M. Bishop, and subsequently by M. Bishop and A. Vitro, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/236 of 12 February 2015 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2015 L 39, p. 18) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2015/230 of 12 February 2015 implementing Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2015 L 39, p. 3), in so far as those measures concern the applicant, or, in the alternative, application under Article 277 TFEU for a declaration of inapplicability of Article 20(1)(c) of Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Common Position 2007/140/CFSP (OJ 2010 L 195, p. 39) and of Article 23(2)(d) of Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1), in so far as those provisions apply to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders National Iranian Tanker Company and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders National Iranian Tanker Company and the Council of the European Union to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 245, 27.7.2015.

1

---