alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2022002EN.01004602.xml

| 3.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 2/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 2/46

---

Action brought on 26 October 2021 — FC v EASO

(Case T-697/21)

(2022/C 2/64)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: FC (represented by: B. Christianos, A. Skoulikis and G. Kelepouri, lawyers)

Defendant: European Asylum Support Office (EASO)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision of the Authority Empowered to Conclude Contracts of Employment (AECE) of EASO No EASO/EDD/2021/112 of 25 July 2021 rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant on 26 March 2021 under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision of the Authority Empowered to Conclude Contracts of Employment (AECE) of EASO No EASO/EDD/2021/112 of 25 July 2021 rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant on 26 March 2021 under Article 90(2) of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union;

| — | order EASO to pay all the costs incurred by the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EASO to pay all the costs incurred by the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by infringement of the applicant’s rights of defence. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by infringement of the applicant’s rights of defence.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by infringement of the right to sound administration. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by infringement of the right to sound administration.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by infringement of the applicant’s right to effective judicial protection. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by infringement of the applicant’s right to effective judicial protection.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by infringement of the general principle of procedural economy. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the contested decision is vitiated by infringement of the general principle of procedural economy.

---
# Debt Relief

- Secretary Cardona Statement Following Supreme Court Oral Arguments Today, U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel  Cardona issued the following statement after the conclusion of oral arguments  before the Supreme Court on the Department’s one-time student debt relief  program:
# C_2022011EN.01003102.xml

| 10.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 11/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11/31

---

Action brought on 18 October 2021 — NFL Properties Europe v EUIPO — Groupe Duval (DUUUVAL)

(Case T-671/21)

(2022/C 11/44)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: NFL Properties Europe GmbH (Eschborn, Germany) (represented by: M. Kloth, R. Briske, D. Habel and M. Tillwich, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Groupe Duval (Boulogne-Billancourt, France)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark DUUUVAL — Application for registration No 18 066 416

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 August 2021 in Case R 243/2021-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 4 August 2021; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of 4 August 2021;

| — | order the opponent to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred in the course of the appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the opponent to pay the costs of the proceedings, including those incurred in the course of the appeal proceedings.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council

---
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819

DCN: SE01025

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION (CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
#### CLUTTER, S. v. BROWN, A. Appeal of: Gallant, B.

1484 WDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/21/2017

No. AD-68-2014 (Greene)

Affirmed
# C_2021391EN.01002001.xml

| 27.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 391/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 391/20

---

Action brought on 20 July 2021 — TM v ECB

(Case T-440/21)

(2021/C 391/28)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: TM (represented by: L. Levi and A. Champetier, lawyers)

Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Executive Board of 15 December 2020 to appoint Ms P. for the position of Director General DG-IS instead of the Applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Executive Board of 15 December 2020 to appoint Ms P. for the position of Director General DG-IS instead of the Applicant;

| — | annul, if need be, the decision of the Executive Board, dated 11 May 2021, rejecting the Special Appeal submitted by the Applicant against the decision not to appoint him; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul, if need be, the decision of the Executive Board, dated 11 May 2021, rejecting the Special Appeal submitted by the Applicant against the decision not to appoint him;

| — | compensate the Applicant for material damages suffered by the decision of 15 December 2020 with an amount of 73 679,47 euros; |
| --- | --- |

—

compensate the Applicant for material damages suffered by the decision of 15 December 2020 with an amount of 73 679,47 euros;

| — | compensate the Applicant for moral prejudice with an amount of one symbolic euro. |
| --- | --- |

—

compensate the Applicant for moral prejudice with an amount of one symbolic euro.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment and a violation of Article 8a (c) of the Conditions of employment, and of Articles 1a.1.1(b), 1a.2.1.1 and 1a.2.6.1 of the Staff Regulations; Violation of the vacancy notice; Breach of the interest of the service. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging a manifest error of assessment and a violation of Article 8a (c) of the Conditions of employment, and of Articles 1a.1.1(b), 1a.2.1.1 and 1a.2.6.1 of the Staff Regulations; Violation of the vacancy notice; Breach of the interest of the service.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging an illegality of the recruitment procedure 2020-2738- EXT due to a breach of Article 1a.3.1.2 § 4 of the Staff Rules and misuse of powers. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging an illegality of the recruitment procedure 2020-2738- EXT due to a breach of Article 1a.3.1.2 § 4 of the Staff Rules and misuse of powers.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging a breach of Articles 1a.2.7.9, 1a.2.7.10 and 1a.2.7.11 of the Staff Rules; Lack of motivation; Breach of the principle of good administration. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging a breach of Articles 1a.2.7.9, 1a.2.7.10 and 1a.2.7.11 of the Staff Rules; Lack of motivation; Breach of the principle of good administration.

---
# Loan Forgiveness

- Statement from Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona on District Court Ruling on the Biden-Harris Administration Student Debt Relief Program U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona issued the following statement regarding today’s district court ruling on student debt relief:
- U.S. Department of Education Estimate: Biden-Harris Student Debt Relief to Cost an Average of $30 Billion Annually Over Next Decade In August, the Biden-Harris Administration announced its plan to cancel up to $20,000 in student debt for eligible borrowers to give working and middle-class families more breathing room as they recover from the pandemic. Today, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) released its estimate of the costs of the Biden-Harris Administration's Student Debt Relief.
- Biden-Harris Administration Announces Final Student Loan Pause Extension Through December 31 and Targeted Debt Cancellation to Smooth Transition to Repayment Today, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) announced a final extension of the pause on student loan repayment, interest, and collections through December 31, 2022. Borrowers should plan to resume payments in January 2023.
- Thanks to Temporary Changes,  U.S. Department of Education Announces Public Service Loan Forgiveness Surpasses $10 Billion in Debt Relief Today, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) announced that it has approved more than $10 billion in debt relief for over 175,000 borrowers in 10 months through the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program.
- U.S. Department of Education Announces Transformational Changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, Will Put Over 550,000 Public Service Workers Closer to Loan Forgiveness Today, the U.S. Department of Education announced an overhaul of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) Program that it will implement over the next year to make the program live up to its promise.
- Extended Closed School Discharge Will Provide 115K Borrowers from ITT Technical Institute More Than $1.1B in Loan Forgiveness Today, the U.S. Department of Education announced it will make $1.1 billion in closed school discharges available to an additional 115,000 borrowers who attended the now-defunct ITT Technical Institute (ITT). This decision is based on a new review of the problems leading up to ITT's closure. These borrowers did not complete their degree or credential and left ITT on or after March 31, 2008.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8679 

To allow certain individuals with prior service under the District of Columbia 

retirement system to make deposits towards annuities under the Civil 

Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 23, 2020 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Reform 

A BILL 

To allow certain individuals with prior service under the 

District of Columbia retirement system to make deposits 

towards annuities under the Civil Service Retirement 

System and the Federal Employees Retirement System, 

and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ANNUITY DEPOSIT FOR CERTAIN SERVICE. 

4 Section 1905(a) of the National Defense Authoriza5 tion Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111–84) is 

6 amended— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8679 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘Qualifying’’ 

2 and inserting ‘‘Except as provided in paragraph (4), 

3 qualifying’’; and 

4 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(4) SERVICE DEPOSIT.— 

6 ‘‘(A) Notwithstanding paragraph (3), the 

7 qualifying District of Columbia service of any 

8 individual who makes a deposit under this para9 graph shall be taken into account for purposes 

10 of computing the amount of any benefit payable 

11 out of the Civil Service Retirement and Dis12 ability Fund under section 8348 of title 5, 

13 United States Code. 

14 ‘‘(B) Any individual— 

15 ‘‘(i) who, pursuant to this section, has 

16 qualifying District of Columbia service in17 cluded in calculating the individual’s cred18 itable service under section 8332, of title 5, 

19 United States Code, may deposit an 

20 amount equal to the product of the basic 

21 pay received for that qualifying service 

22 multiplied by the applicable percentage, or 

23 percentages, in section 8334(c) of such 

24 title, plus interest (computed in accordance 

25 with section 8334(e) of such title); or 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 8679 IH

1 ‘‘(ii) who, pursuant to this section, 

2 has qualifying District of Columbia service 

3 included in calculating the individual’s 

4 creditable service under section 8411 of 

5 such title may deposit an amount equal to 

6 1.3 percent of basic pay received for that 

7 qualifying service, plus interest (computed 

8 in accordance with section 8334(e) of such 

9 title). 

10 ‘‘(C) For the purpose of survivor annuities, 

11 deposits authorized by this paragraph may be 

12 made by a survivor of an individual described in 

13 subparagraph (B)(i) or (B)(ii). 

14 ‘‘(D) Any deposit made under this para15 graph shall be credited to the Civil Service Re16 tirement and Disability Fund. 

17 ‘‘(E) The Office of Personnel Management 

18 shall issue such regulations as may be necessary 

19 to carry out this paragraph.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10030-10031]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5326]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP96-317-002]


Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited Partnership; Notice of 
Compliance Filing

February 27, 1997.
    Take notice that on February 25, 1997, Great Lakes Gas Transmission 
Limited Partnership (Great Lakes), tendered for

[[Page 10031]]

filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, the following revised 
tariff sheets:

Second Revised Volume No. 1

Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 6
Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 9
Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 53
Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 54
Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 59
Substitute Original Sheet No. 59A
Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 60

Original Volume No. 2

Substitute Sixth Revised Sheet No. 3-A

    Great Lakes states that on February 3, 1997, in Docket No. RP96-
317-000, the Commission issued an order accepting Great Lakes' proposal 
to implement a revised fuel allocation methodology to reflect a more 
distance sensitive methodology than the present zone-based method 
presently utilized. Under the revised fuel allocation methodology, 
Great Lakes' Transporter's Use percentages applicable to transportation 
services are to be determined on a 75-mile basis.
    Pursuant to the Commission's February 3, 1997 order, Great Lakes 
filed the revised tariff sheets to implement the approved revision to 
the methodology for allocating system fuel and other use gas, and the 
corresponding determination of Transporter's Use percentages, from a 
zone-based methodology to a 75-mile based methodology. Great Lakes 
requested that the revised tariff sheets filed herein become effective 
on April 1, 1997.
    Great Lakes states that copies of its filing were served on each of 
its firm customers, parties on the official service list in this 
proceeding, and the Public Service Commissions of the States of 
Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Copies of 
this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection in the Commission's Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-5326 Filed 3-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1992
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1992
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of JB Oxford Holdings, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Christopher L. Jarratt, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1) 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
Company.




/s/  Christopher L. Jarratt
Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2002
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Brett D. Davis, certify that:

 

1.             I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of CNH Equipment Trust 2015-A (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.             Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.             Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.             I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.             All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas.

 

----

 

March 29, 2016

 
|   |   | By:    | /s/ Brett D. Davis                                               |
|--------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Name:  | Brett D. Davis                                                   |
|   |   | Title: | President (senior   officer in charge of the servicing function) |

 

----