alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### F. C. Gerlach & Co. *v.*United States

No. 8076.

Entry No. 717396.

(Decided January 25, 1952)

*Benjamin A. Levett*for the plaintiff.

*Charles J. Wagner,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has 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 this appeal for reappraisement are the same in all material respects as the issues decided in United States v. Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp., Suit No. 4513, C. A. D. 334 and that the record in said case may be incorporated herein.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appraised values of the merchandise involved in the entry covered by this reappraisement less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases, is equal to the price, at which such or similar merchandise is freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, and that the foreign value of such or similar merchandise is no higher.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this case may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I 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 merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 146 (Wednesday, July 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 40802]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19960]



[[Page 40802]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 072197G]


Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Committee 
on Alternative Groundfish Management will hold a public meeting.

DATES: The meeting will begin on Wednesday, August 20, 1997, at 9:00 
a.m. and may go into the evening until business for the day is 
completed.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the Mt. St. Helens Room at the 
Shilo Inn - Portland Airport, 11707 NE Airport Way, Portland, OR.
    Council address: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 2130 SW Fifth 
Avenue, Suite 224, Portland, OR 97201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Six, Executive Director; 
telephone: (503) 326-6352.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: At the request of the Council, the Committee 
will discuss alternatives to the year-round fishery for potential 
implementation in 1998. Other alternative management strategies to be 
discussed include a full retention program, marine harvest regues, and 
others. The Committee will present their findings at the September 8-12 
Council meeting.

Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Eric Greene at (503) 326-6352 at least 5 days 
prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: July 23, 1997.
Bruce C. Morehead,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 97-19960 Filed 7-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
No. 96-1305.

#### Hampton *v.*Illinois.

App. Ct. Ill, 2d Dist. Certiorari denied.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# DLA director visits the U.S. Indo-Pacific theatre

By DLA Indo-Pacific

                OKINAWA, Japan  –              
Defense Logistics Agency Director Lt. Gen. Darrell Williams visited the U.S. Indo-Pacific theatre early this month. In Okinawa, Japan, Feb. 4, he observed DLA Energy’s fuel distribution capabilities. DLA Energy Okinawa Commander, Air Force Maj. Tracy Gilmore and her team provided Williams a tour of the Single-Point Mooring and Three-legged Mooring systems, which are anchored to the sea floor and used for the on-load and off-load of aviation fuel to the island. The SPM and TLM highlight the unique capabilities the DLA Energy team in Okinawa operate and maintain to provide first-class service to Indo-Pacific warfighters. 

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

Indo-Pacificfuel
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM McGRANN,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a

member of Chubb Group of Insurance

Companies,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 09-55007

D.C. No. 8:07-cv-00685-AG-RNB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Andrew J. Guilford, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 14, 2010** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 

William McGrann appeals pro se from the district court’s summary

judgment in his diversity action arising from Federal Insurance Company’s denial

of his disability insurance claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 

FILED

JAN 07 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-55007

We review de novo, Learned v. City of Bellevue, 860 F.2d 928, 931 (9th Cir.

1988), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on McGrann’s breach

of contract claim because he failed to raise a triable issue as to whether his wrist

injuries from using his computer mouse were the result of an “accident” and

therefore covered by the insurance policy. See Williams v. Hartford Accident &

Indem. Co., 204 Cal. Rptr. 453, 456 (Ct. App. 1984) (rejecting argument that the

term “accident,” for insurance coverage purposes, includes an injury due to a

commonplace act); see also Gin v. Pennsylvania Life Ins. Co., 36 Cal. Rptr. 3d

571, 574 (Ct. App. 2005) (rejecting accidental disability claim for carpal tunnel

syndrome because “a disability that is the culmination of repetitive stresses caused

by the insured’s normal, everyday activities is not the result of an ‘accidental

bodily injury’ and therefore does not fall within the coverage of the policy”).

The district court properly granted summary judgment on McGrann’s

common counts claim because McGrann failed to raise a triable issue as to whether

Federal Insurance Company was indebted to him, because the company properly

denied his insurance claim. See Farmers Ins. Exch. v. Zerin, 61 Cal. Rptr. 2d 707,

715 (Ct. App. 1997) (stating elements of common counts claim).
3 09-55007

The district court properly granted summary judgment on McGrann’s fraud

claim based on Federal Insurance Company’s alleged oral misrepresentation

because McGrann failed to raise a triable issue as to whether he was justified in

believing that he had purchased an insurance policy guaranteeing him a $1.5

million payment. See Lazar v. Superior Court, 909 P.3d 981, 984 (Cal. 1996)

(fraud claim requires “justifiable reliance”).

We do not consider McGrann’s contentions raised for the first time on

appeal. See Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. ConocoPhillips Co., 546 F.3d

1142, 1146 (9th Cir. 2008).

McGrann’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.

We deny McGrann’s request for sanctions.

AFFIRMED.
# C_2014409EN.01002401.xml

| 17.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 409/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 409/24

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 July 2014 — Cytochroma Development, Inc. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-490/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeals - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Community trade mark - Opposition procedure - Article 169(1) of the Rules of Procedure - Appeal not brought against the operative part of the judgment under appeal - Appeal manifestly unfounded))

2014/C 409/34

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Cytochroma Development, Inc. (represented by: S. Malynicz, Barrister, A. Smith, Solicitor)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Cytochroma Development Inc. is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Cytochroma Development Inc. is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 352, of 30.11.2013.

1

---
112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 216 

AN ACT 

To increase criminal penalties for certain knowing and intentional violations relating to food that is misbranded or 

adulterated. 

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

†S 216 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Food Safety Account3 ability Act of 2011’’. 

4 SEC. 2. CRIMINAL PENALTIES. 

5 Section 303(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cos6 metic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(a)) is amended— 

7 (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘Any’’ and in8 serting ‘‘Except as provided in paragraph (2) or (3), 

9 any’’; 

10 (2) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘Notwith11 standing the provisions of paragraph (1) of this sec12 tion, if’’ and inserting ‘‘If’’; and 

13 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

14 ‘‘(3) Any person who violates subsection (a), (b), (c), 

15 or (k) of section 301 with respect to any food— 

16 ‘‘(A) knowingly and intentionally to defraud or 

17 mislead; and 

18 ‘‘(B) with conscious or reckless disregard of a 

19 risk of death or serious bodily injury, 

20 shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, impris21 oned for not more than 10 years, or both.’’. 

Passed the Senate April 4, 2011. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 216 

AN ACT 

To increase criminal penalties for certain knowing 

misbranded or adulterated. and intentional violations relating to food that is
#### Gimbel Bros., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 7682.

Invoice dated Toronto, Canada, October 17, 1947.

Certified October 17, 1947.

Entered at New York, N. Y., November 10, 1947.

Entry No. 731067.

(Decided March 9, 1949)

*Fred Bennett*for the plaintiff.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General *(Charles J. Miville,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been subr mitted 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 issue in the appeal for reappraisement listed above is the same in all material respects as the issues decided in *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States,*R. D. 7624, and that the record in said case may be incorporated herein.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appraised values of the merchandise involved in the above-enumerated case, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases, are equal to the price, at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise is freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, and that the foreign value of such or similar merchandise is no higher.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this case may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On tbe agreed facts I find tbe export value, as tbat value is defined in section 402 (d) of tbe Tariff Act of 1930, to be tbe proper basis for tbe determination of tbe value of tbe merchandise here involved, and tbat sucb values are tbe appraised values, less tbe additions made by tbe importer on entry because of advances by tbe appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
# C_2013108EN.01002702.xml

| 13.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/27

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 17 January 2013 — Slovenia v Commission

(Case T-507/12 R)

(Interim measures - State aid - Decision declaring the aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery from the recipient - Application for stay of execution - Lack of urgency)

2013/C 108/70

Language of the case: Slovenian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Republic of Slovenia (represented by: V. Klemenc and A. Grum, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier, D. Kukovec and T. Maxian Rusche, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for a stay of execution of Commission Decision C(2012) 6345 final of 19 September 2012 on measures in favour of the undertaking ELAN d.o.o. [SA.26379 (C-13/2010) (ex NN 17/2010)].

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The application for interim measures is rejected.

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

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
# C_2013225EN.01005402.xml

| 3.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 225/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 225/54

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 8 May 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Tivoli (Italy)) — T

(Case C-73/13) (1)

1

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Implementation of EU law - None - Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court)

2013/C 225/100

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale di Tivoli

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: T

Applicant:

Re:

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Tivoli — Interpretation of Article 47(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, read in conjunction with Article 6 TEU and Article 52(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights — Legal aid — National legislation providing that counsel’s fees may not exceed the average amounts applied in accordance with the professional rates in force where the client has been granted legal aid

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice clearly lacks jurisdiction to answer the questions referred by the Tribunale di Tivoli (Italy).

---

(1)  OJ C 147, 25.5.2013.

1

---
# C_2016222EN.01004503.xml

| 20.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/45

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 29 April 2016 — Sommier v Commission

(Case F-147/12) (1)

(2016/C 222/60)

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 23/2/2013, p. 26.

---
No. 96-453.

#### Buchanan, Individually and as Personal Representative for the Estate of Buchanan *v.*United States.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 Justice Drug Enforcement Administration
 By Notice dated November 21, 2006, and published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     on December 1, 2006, (71 FR 69589-69590), Chattem Chemicals, Inc., 3801 St. Elmo Avenue, Building 18, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37409, made application by renewal and by letter to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed in schedule I and II: Drug
Schedule4-Methoxyamphetamine (7411)
IDihydromorphine (9145)
IDifenoxin (9168)
IAmphetamine (1100)
IIMethamphetamine (1105)
IIMethylphenidate (1724)
IIPentobarbital (2270)
IICodeine (9050)
IIDihydrocodeine (9120)
IIOxycodone (9143)
IIHydromorphone (9150)
IIHydrocodone (9193)
IIMeperidine (9230)
IIDextropropoxyphene, bulk (non-dosage forms) (9273)
IIMorphine (9300)
IIThebaine (9333)
IIOxymorphone (9652)
IINoroxymorphone (9668)
IIAlfentanil (9737)
IISufentanil (9740)
IIFentanyl (9801)
II
 The company plans to manufacture the listed controlled substances in bulk for distribution to its customers. By letter dated February 15, 2007, Chattem Chemicals has withdrawn their request for N-Ethylamphetamine (1475), Secobarbital (2315), 2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine (7396), Diphenoxylate (9170), Opium Extracts (9610), Opium Fluid Extract (9620), Opium Tincture (9630), Opium Powdered (9639), and Opium Granulated (9640). One comment has been received; this comment has been noted and considered by DEA. 
                    ( print page 28073) DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Chattem Chemicals, Inc. to manufacture the listed basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest at this time. DEA has investigated Chattem Chemicals, Inc. to ensure that the company's registration is consistent with the public interest. The investigation has included inspection and testing of the company's physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance with State and local laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823, and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed. Dated: May 14, 2007. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.


[FR Doc. E7-9644 Filed 5-17-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
# C_2015118EN.01000902.xml

| 13.4.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 12 February 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — Surgicare — Unidades de Saúde SA v Fazenda Pública

(Case C-662/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - VAT - Directive 2006/112/EC - Deduction of input tax - Transactions constituting an abusive practice - National tax law - Special national procedure where the existence of abusive practices is suspected in the field of taxation - Principles of effectiveness and equivalence))

(2015/C 118/12)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Surgicare — Unidades de Saúde SA

Applicant:

Defendant: Fazenda Pública

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude the mandatory preliminary application of a national administrative procedure, such as that laid down by Article 63 of the Code of Taxation Procedure and Proceedings (Código de Procedimento e de Processo Tributário), in the event that the revenue authorities suspect the existence of an abusive practice.

---

(1)  OJ C 78, 15.3.2014.

1

---