alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

NOTICE OF SALE OF PEANUTS

FOR RELEASE AT 1:30 P.M. CT September 24, 2019

U. S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service today announced the sale of peanuts. The peanuts 

were sold under Peanut Invitation No. 9 dated September 13, 2019.

1 Trenton, FL Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 3,478.32 $ 345.00 $1,200,020.40 Runner

4 Smithville, GA Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 2,014.38 $ 337.25 $679,349.66 Runner

5 Smithville, GA Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 2,013.20 $ 338.50 $681,468.20 Runner

6 Smithville, GA Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 2,017.17 $ 337.25 $680,290.58 Runner

7 Smithville, GA Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 2,016.64 $ 338.50 $682,632.64 Runner

8 Smithville, GA Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 2,007.25 $ 337.25 $676,945.06 Runner

9 Smithville, GA Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 1,875.05 $ 338.25 $634,235.66 Runner

10 Trenton, FL Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 1,897.52 $ 325.00 $616,694.00 Runner

19 Samson, AL Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 1,893.09 $ 331.50 $627,559.34 Runner

20 Samson, AL Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 1,892.38 $ 332.25 $628,743.26 Runner

21 Samson, AL Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 1,913.15 $ 332.25 $635,644.09 Runner

22 Samson, AL Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 1,866.94 $ 331.00 $617,957.14 Runner

23 Samson, AL Golden Peanut & Tree Nuts 1,869.04 $ 331.00 $618,652.24 Runner

24 Mount Olive, NC Golden Grove USA, Inc. 1,809.31 $ 365.00 $660,398.15 Virginia

Totals 28,563.44 $9,640,590.41 

 Bid Price 

(per Ton) CCC Revenue Peanut Type Catalog Lot Catalog Location Purchaser Tons Sold
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                 Exhibit 10.15.1
                                 PROMISSORY NOTE



<S>                                            <C>
   $400,000.00
-------------------------


                                               Greenville, South Carolina
                                               February 14, 2002



              FOR VALUE RECEIVED                RSI Holdings, Inc.
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------------

                               28 EAST COURT STREET, GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA 29601
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

promises to pay                                       Buck A. Mickel
                           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                     6 Woodland Way Circle, South Carolina 29601
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the sum of                            Four Hundred Thousand Dollars and No/100--------------------
                    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        bearing interest only             from          date of this note         at the rate of          7.00%
---------------------------------------            -----------------------------                    ------------------

to be computed and paid quarterly.      Any accrued interest and unpaid principal shall be

be paid in full on or before                                          February 14, 2007
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                     RSI Holdings, Inc.



                                        By:         /s/ Buck A. Mickel                           3-25-04
                                                    ----------------------------------------------------
                                                     Buck A. Mickel                                Date
                                                     President & CEO
</TABLE>
# C_2018436EN.01001601.xml

| 3.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 436/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 436/16

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 2 August 2018 — NH v Associazione Avvocatura per i diritti LGBTI — Rete Lenford

(Case C-507/18)

(2018/C 436/20)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: NH

Respondent: Associazione Avvocatura per i diritti LGBTI — Rete Lenford

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 9 of Directive 2000/78/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that an association composed of lawyers specialised in the judicial protection of LGBTI persons, the statutes of which state that its objective is to promote LGBTI culture and respect for the rights of LGBTI persons, automatically, as a legal person having a collective interest and as a non-profit association, has standing to bring proceedings, including in respect of a claim for damages, in circumstances of alleged discrimination against LGBTI persons? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 9 of Directive 2000/78/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that an association composed of lawyers specialised in the judicial protection of LGBTI persons, the statutes of which state that its objective is to promote LGBTI culture and respect for the rights of LGBTI persons, automatically, as a legal person having a collective interest and as a non-profit association, has standing to bring proceedings, including in respect of a claim for damages, in circumstances of alleged discrimination against LGBTI persons?

| 2. | On a proper construction of Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2000/78/EC, does a statement expressing a negative opinion with regard to homosexuals, whereby, in an interview given during a radio entertainment programme, the interviewee stated that he would never appoint an LGBTI person to his law firm nor wish to use the services of such persons, fall within the scope of the anti-discrimination rules laid down in that directive, even if that statement does not relate to any current or planned recruitment procedure by the interviewee? |
| --- | --- |

2.

On a proper construction of Articles 2 and 3 of Directive 2000/78/EC, does a statement expressing a negative opinion with regard to homosexuals, whereby, in an interview given during a radio entertainment programme, the interviewee stated that he would never appoint an LGBTI person to his law firm nor wish to use the services of such persons, fall within the scope of the anti-discrimination rules laid down in that directive, even if that statement does not relate to any current or planned recruitment procedure by the interviewee?

---

(1)  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16).

---
ANIMAL CARE AID

Questions? Email us at CenterforAnimalWelfare@aphis.usda.gov 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Animal Care

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

Credit: Dog illustration at upper right created by Cristiano Zoucas from the Noun Project AC-18-002 • Issued June 2018

Canine Periodontal Disease (PD)

WHAT IS PD?

Inflammation of 

tissues and bone 

that surround and 

support the teeth 

due to a bacterial 

infection. PD 

is sometimes 

referred to as 

dental disease.

HOW DOES PD DEVELOP?

When food and bacteria collect along the gumline, plaque 

forms that eventually hardens into tartar. Tartar irritates the 

gums, causing inflammation called gingivitis. If left untreated, 

the tartar builds up under the gum line, resulting in PD. Dogs 

may experience pain, infection, abscesses, and tooth loss as 

the disease becomes more severe. 

Tartar

 Note the large amount of 

yellowish material on the teeth

Gingivitis

Note the redness and 

inflammation at the gumline

Severe PD

Note the missing teeth, 

tartar, and gingivitis

RISK FACTORS:

Certain characteristics of the dog 

increase the risk of PD.

BREED SIZE

In general, the smaller 

the dog, the higher 

the risk.

MUZZLE LENGTH

Short-muzzled breeds 

may be at increased risk 

due to overcrowding 

of the teeth.

AGE

The older the dog, the 

more likely it is to have 

some degree of PD.

BREED

Certain breeds, such as 

Greyhounds, are known 

to be at increased risk.

DOES YOUR DOG HAVE PD?

The earliest and most common sign is bad breath. The following signs may 

indicate your dog has advanced PD:

If you see any of these signs, consult with your veterinarian for treatment options.

l Excessive drooling, licking

l Repeated pawing or rubbing of face 

and mouth

l Swelling of the face

l Difficulty chewing

l Loss of appetite

l Weight loss

l Aggression, head shyness (moving 

away) when attempting to look in 

the mouth

PD Causes Significant 

Health and Welfare Problems

More than 80% of dogs 

over 2 years of age 

have PD

This Animal Care Aid is part of a series developed to provide information about PD in dogs. 

For more information, refer to the other topics covered in the series (“Monitoring PD in Dogs” and “Preventive Care for PD in Dogs”).

Increased risk of:

Kidney disease

Liver disease

Heart disease

Bleeding gums

Tooth loss

Pain

May increase the risk of premature birth, low birth

weight, increased infant mortality, small litters
28174

#### State v. Revilla

Affirmed
June 21, 2004

25822

#### City and County of Honolulu v. Attractions Hawaii

Affirmed
!	
 
"
" # $%&	 ' (

) *+,-./0.1 .2 345+6+5 345+6+578 9 :55

$<KL=M(NO>PQKRS?T
$@@; >?
$@@?ABCBB; D-4E5FG.1H1IJII UMRRVLSWMXSQP

YKLXMWQLSKLMNOPQKRSTZ[TSVN ZVTTKMR\KPPV]OKXVKR^_NKR`SVT ab`cQR^defghighhjZa^k^h

lVOMXSmKPSVXnoOSKMRTpj]KSqMmVQXYMr`PV

stuvwsxywz{x|}~yyz~u}~{v~vz~|

uuv}~~z~|z|v~

v}|wz

z}uv~|zy|z|}}v

zxywv}~~~{

zxyvv~|v~v

|zuvw|vv~v 

u

¡ ¢ £    

q`N¤VXM¥UMNOPQKRSTmKPVr dk ¦k h¦ hh h_ ^_

q`N¤VXM¥UMNOPQKRQRST fh h_ h¦ hh hi ^_

lVOVQSmKPVXT fekk^ k zxywv}~{§v

zxyvv~|v~v

|zuvw|vv~v 

u

   ̈©a«¬­©® ̄°±23a ́μ±3¶«·2°« ̧±°°«1231®o°a2 ̄°«¶± ́« ́»

1⁄41⁄2« ́o®©·a1⁄2«¶± ́« ́®±3⁄43©a«¿o±°a©a±°μ©® ̄°±23a ́·2°« ̧» ¡ ¢ £  

lQLV ei e¦ eh e¦ ^^ f UMPMX d ¦ ^ Àeh ^ lVPKÁKMR ^¦kkf ¦ lVOXKTQP he ^¦ ^k eÀ ^k e¦

ZV] eÀ e_ ee e¦ ed À WÂÃ ekkkk k qQSKMRQPoXKÁKR _h¦¦_ e jÄ`QPWQ[ÃLS kek^e k ÃÁV ^e e^ ee eki f ÂKTQ¤KPKS[ eÀ ^k ei e¦ e¦ eÀ

ÅVRVSKLT kkeek k qMRÆjjo ¦^^ff f zxywv}~{u| zxyvv~|v~v

|zuvw|vv~v 

u

   ̈©a«¬­©® ̄°±23a ́μ±3¶«·2°« ̧±°°«1231®o°a2 ̄°«¶± ́« ́»

1⁄41⁄2« ́o®©·a1⁄2«¶± ́« ́®±3⁄43©a«¿o±°a©a±°μ©® ̄°±23a ́·2°« ̧» ¡ ¢ £  

ÃOOMKRSNVRSnÇKXV ek^^e k ÃTTKÁRNVRSM¥Â`SKVT idh^k k Ã\QXrT kkekk k U K SmPPaK nW ZSS kkkkk k

OQÁV

LMXRVX

UMRSVRSÈMr[qQÉKÁQSKMRÊKRËT

 	   !	
 Ì Í Î ÏÐÏ Î Ñ
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-10478

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

BRIAN BERNARD WILLIN,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 6:12-CR-42-1

Before PRADO, ELROD, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Brian Bernard 

Willin has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Willin has filed a response and requests the appointment 

of substitute counsel. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant 

portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Willin’s response. We concur 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 16, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-10478 Document: 00512599044 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/16/2014
No. 13-10478

with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, Willin’s motion for the appointment of counsel 

is DENIED, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 13-10478 Document: 00512599044 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/16/2014
922 P.2d 1058

August 29, 1996

17281

#### State v. Fillingame

Vacated
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.1 


This CONTRACT, effective as of June 29, 2018 (the “Effective Date”), is by and between Chevron Corporation, with offices at 6001 Bollinger Canyon Road, San Ramon, CA 94583 (“Company”), and John S. Watson (“Retired Executive”).
This Contract is intended to memorialize the agreement by and between the Company and Retired Executive with respect to Retired Executive’s post-retirement services to the Company.
		
	1.
	From time to time, Retired Executive shall perform services to the Company as the Company may request.  Such services shall include meeting with Company’s Chief Executive Officer and other Company personnel, providing historical background information, attending Company and Company sponsored events, and assisting with promoting the Company’s good reputation through serving on other Boards of Directors and participating in charitable activities.  These activities should not consume more than twenty hours per month of the Retired Executive’s time.




		
	2.
	Company will provide Retired Executive with an office of the Company’s selection and an administrative support staff person to assist the Retired Executive in providing these services to the Company.




		
	3.
	Retired Executive and Company acknowledge and agree that the parties’ relationship between them with respect to the services to be provided by the Retired Executive to the Company under this Contract shall be one of an independent contractor.




		
	4.
	Retired Executive may not assign its rights or obligations under this Contract without the prior written consent of the Company.




The Parties have executed this Contract as evidenced by the following signatures of authorized representatives of the Parties.


	
			
	Company:    
	 
	Retired Executive:

	Chevron Corporation
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	Signature:    
	 
	Signature:

	 
	 
	 

	/S/   Kari H. Endries
	 
	/s/ John S. Watson

	Name:      Kari H. Endries
	 
	Name:      John S. Watson

	Title:       Assistant Secretary
	 
	Title:      Chairman and CEO, Retired

	Date:      June 27, 2018
	 
	Date:      June 20, 2018






                    


                            43
Order entered January 22, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-01466-CV

DAVID LEMON, ET AL., Appellants

V.

STRAIT CAPITAL COMPANY, LTD., Appellee

On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-08245

ORDER

Before the Court is appellants’ January 16, 2019 unopposed second motion for an 

extension of time to file a brief. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to January 30, 

2019. 

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Daniel Koenig, Appellant.

Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Second Department,

June 19, 1959.

*Henry Gallop*for appellant.

*Edward 8. Silver, District Attorney (Raymond Scanlan*of counsel), for respondent.

A. Lawrence Acquavella, J.

The defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him of the violation of subdivision C-l of section 81 of the Traffic Regulations established by the Commissioner of Traffic, in that he parked his automobile in front of a private driveway.

The defendant concedes that his station wagon was parked on the street in front of a driveway, but he argues that the driveway was his own. He contends that the regulation was designed to protect his right of access to and egress from his own garage and that as the owner and occupant of the premises in question, he had a right to park his vehicle on the street in front of his own driveway.

There is no question that the regulation herein was intended to protect the right of an owner to have free access to and from his property. However, that did not give the defendant the right to park his own car where such parking was specifically prohibited. The fundamental idea of a public street or highway is that it is public for all purposes. If the regulation had prohibited parking in front of a driveway by anyone except the owner of the property containing that driveway, the exemption of such owner from the operation of the regulation would be ruled discriminatory and designed for the interest of a special class and would accordingly be void. A regulation must be reasonable and ‘ ‘ must operate with substantial equality *935and uniformity”. *(People*v. *Greeman,*137 N. Y. S. 2d 388, 389; *People*v. *Cohen,*272 N. Y. 319.)

The judgment should be affirmed.

Gassman, P. J., and Ringel, J., concur.

Judgment affirmed.
May 13, 2003

23461

#### State v. Hanson

Affirmed
#### State v. Simard

17223, 17332

9/28/95

Affirmed
Attachment. Visual Summary of Crop Group Phase IV RevisionsChanges from Groups 4 and 5 to Groups 4-16, 5-16 and 22

• Representative commodities for each crop group/subgroup are in parentheses to the 

left of the text boxes.

• Blue arrows represent the movement of subgroups/individual commodities.

• Commodities in orange are moving to a new crop subgroup, with a new 

representative commodity.

• Commodities with underline and strikethrough are not proposed to be included in 

any new crop group. 
Amaranth

Arugula (to 4-16B)

Chervil

Chrysanthemum, Edibleleaved

Chrysanthemum, Garland 

Corn Salad 

Cress, Garden (to 4-16B)

Cress, Upland (to 4-16B)

Dandelion 

Dock 

Endive 

Lettuce 

Orach

Parsley

Purslane, Garden 

Purslane, Winter 

Radicchio (Red Chicory) 

Spinach 

Spinach, New Zealand

Spinach, Vine

Cardoon (to 22B)

Celery (to 22B)

Celery, Chinese (to 22B)

Celtuce (to 22A)

Fennel, Florence (to 22A)

Rhubarb (to 22B)

Swiss Chard (to 4-16A)

Broccoli

Broccoli, Chinese (to 4-16B)

Brussels Sprouts 

Cabbage 

Cabbage, Chinese (Napa) 

Cabbage, Chinese Mustard 

Cauliflower

Cavalo Broccoli

Kohlrabi (to 22A)

Broccoli raab

Cabbage, Chinese (bok choy)

Collards

Kale

Mizuna

Mustard greens

Mustard spinach

Rape greens

4-16A, Rep Commodity: 

Lettuce, Spinach

Amaranth, Chinese; Amaranth, 

leafy; Aster, Indian; Blackjack; 

Cat’s whiskers; Chervil, fresh 

leaves; Cham-chwi; ,Cham-namul; Chipilin; Chrysanthemum, 

garland; Cilantro, fresh leaves; 

Corn salad; Cosmos; Dandelion; 

Dang-gwi; Dillweed; Dock; Dolnam-mul; Ebolo; Endive; 

Escarole; Fameflower; Feather 

cockscomb ; Good King Henry; 

Huauzontle; Jute leaves; Lettuce, 

bitter; Lettuce, head; Lettuce, 

leaf; Orach, Parsley, fresh leaves; 

Plantain, buckhorn; Primrose, 

English; Purslane, garden; 

Purslane, winter; Radicchio; 

Spinach; Spinach, Malabar; 

Spinach, New Zealand; Swiss 

chard; Tanier spinach; Violet, 

Chinese

Arugula; Broccoli raab; Broccoli, 

Chinese; Cabbage, Abyssinian; 

Cabbage, seakale; Chinese 

cabbage, bok choy; Collards; 

Cress, garden; Cress, upland; 

Hanover salad; Kale; Maca; 

Mizuna; Mustard greens; Radish, 

leaves; Rape greens; Rocket, wild; 

Shepherd’s purse; Turnip greens; 

Watercress 

Agave; Aloe vera; Asparagus; 

Bamboo shoots; Celtuce; Fennel, 

Florence, fresh leaves and stalk; 

Fern, edible (fiddlehead); Kale, sea; 

Kohlrabi; Palm hearts; Prickly pear, 

pads; Prickly pear, Texas, pads

Cardoon; Celery; Celery, Chinese; 

Fuki; Rhubarb; Udo; Zuiki

Phase IV 

Crop Group Changes

4A, Rep Commodity: Lettuces, Spinach

4B, Rep Commodity: Celery

5A, Rep Commodity: Cabbage; Broccoli or Cauliflower

5B, Rep Commodity: Mustard Greens

5-16, Rep Commodity: Cabbage; Broccoli or 

Cauliflower

Broccoli; Brussels sprouts; Cabbage; Cabbage, Chinese, napa; 

Cauliflower

4-16B, Rep Commodity: Mustard Greens

22A: Rep Commodity; 

Asparagus

22B: Rep Commodity; 

Celery
#### Marsha Bolkin, an Infant, by Her Guardian ad Litem Lawrence Kamer et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*Max Levy et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Bronx County,

February 11, 1959.

*Julius C. Levy*for plaintiffs.

*Stanley D. Hichs*for Tidewater Coal Docks Corporation, defendant.

*Martin A. Cream*for Max Levy, defendant.

Francis X. Conlon, J.

As a result of the decision of the Appellate Division (5 A D 2d 824) and the infant plaintiff’s consent to a reduction of the verdict against Tidewater, the latter is liable for $16,500, plus interest and costs *(Schultz*v. *United States Fidelity & Guar. Co.,*201 N. Y. 230; *Bernstein*v. *Siegel,*204 Misc. 750). Tidewater’s present motion, to the extent that it seeks to have the judgment entered against *both*defendants reduced to $16,500, is, accordingly, denied. Insofar as Tidewater seeks an order permitting it to make a deposit into court, the motion is likewise denied. No order of the court is necessary under subdivision 4 of section 530 of the Civil Practice Act. Furthermore, the deposit under that section must include ‘ ‘ a sum equal to two per centum of said judgment ’ ’, whereas the deposit proposed by Tidewater does not include said 2%.

To the extent that Tidewater seeks to compel the codefendant to pay a specified part of the judgment, the motion is also denied, as premature. Until Tidewater has made a payment or a deposit into court, it is in no position to move for contribution under section 211-a of the Civil Practice Act.

Insofar as relief is sought against the County Clerk, the motion is also denied, as premature. Until a deposit of the amount required by subdivision 4 of section 530 has been made, Tidewater is not entitled to any relief against the County Clerk.

It is unnecessary, for the purposes of the present motion, to decide the effect of the alleged agreement between Commercial Casualty Insurance Co. and the codefendant.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 6, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 84819]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-26767]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreements Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of filing of the following 
agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may 
submit comments, relevant information, or documents regarding the 
agreements to the Secretary by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3e6d5b5d4c5b4a5f4c477e58535d10595148"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e4b7818796819085969da4828987ca838b92">[email protected]</span></a>, or by mail, 
Federal Maritime Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, Washington, DC 
20573. Comments will be most helpful to the Commission if received 
within 12 days of the date this notice appears in the Federal Register, 
and the Commission requests that comments be submitted within 7 days on 
agreements that request expedited review. Copies of agreements are 
available through the Commission's website (www.fmc.gov) or by 
contacting the Office of Agreements at (202)-523-5793 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#601412010405010e010c1913091320060d034e070f16"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a5d1d7c4c1c0c4cbc4c9dcd6ccd6e5c3c8c68bc2cad3">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Agreement No.: 201412.
    Agreement Name: MSC/Ellerman Space Charter Agreement.
    Parties: MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company SA; Ellerman City 
Liners Ltd.
    Filing Party: Wayne Rohde; Cozen O'Connor.
    Synopsis: The agreement authorizes MSC to charter space to Ellerman 
in the trade between ports in Sweden, Poland, Lithuania, Germany, the 
United Kingdom, Belgium and France on the one hand, and ports on the 
East Coast of the United States on the other hand.
    Proposed Effective Date: 12/1/2023.
    Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.Agreements.Web/Public/AgreementHistory/84531.

    Dated: December 1, 2023.
Carl Savoy,
Federal Register Alternate Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2023-26767 Filed 12-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-02-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>