alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2013252EN.01001901.xml

| 31.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/19

---

Appeal brought on 27 May 2013 by European Commission against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 14 March 2013 in Case T-587/08: Fresh Del Monte Produce, Inc. v European Commission

(Case C-294/13 P)

2013/C 252/28

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: A. Biolan, M. Kellerbauer, P.J.O. Van Nuffel, agents)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Fresh Del Monte Produce, Inc., Internationale Fruchtimport Gesellschaft Weichert GmbH & Co. KG

Other parties to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | Set aside point 1 of the operative part judgment of the General Court of 14 March 2013 in Case T-587/08, Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc. v Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

Set aside point 1 of the operative part judgment of the General Court of 14 March 2013 in Case T-587/08, Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc. v Commission;

| — | Give final judgment by setting the amount of the fine for Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc. at EUR 9 800 000; |
| --- | --- |

—

Give final judgment by setting the amount of the fine for Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc. at EUR 9 800 000;

| — | Order Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc. to pay the costs of the appeal and such proportion of the costs of the proceedings before the General Court as the Court of Justice considers appropriate. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc. to pay the costs of the appeal and such proportion of the costs of the proceedings before the General Court as the Court of Justice considers appropriate.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission submits that the General Court infringed Article 23 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (1) read together with the Commission notice on immunity from fines and reduction of fines in cartel cases (2) and the principle of effective enforcement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU, by considering that information supplied to the Commission in response to a request for information must be taken into account for a reduction of the fine as voluntary cooperation having facilitated the Commission’s investigation.

1

2

In the alternative, the Commission submits that the General Court infringed Article 23 of Regulation No 1/2003 and the duty to state reasons by reducing the fine imposed on Del Monte for Weichert’s cooperation during the administrative procedure although Del Monte and Weichert no longer formed part of the same undertaking at the point in time of Weichert’s alleged cooperative conduct.

---

(1)  OJ L 1, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 45, p. 3.

2

---
No. 10-5023.

#### Leonard Sapp, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 899, 131 S. Ct. 229,

178 L. Ed. 2d 152,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6020.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 370 Fed. Appx. 63.
%~* STA%

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

< ~d Z

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

4”~q~ PRO1~’

October 15, 2014

Mexican Water Chapter, Navajo Nation Reservation

Red Mesa TP #1019, HC 61 Box 38

TeecNosPos, AZ 86514

ATTN: Martha Saggboy

Subject: Request to retain public documents at the Mexican Water Chapter for public

inspection

Dear Ms. Saggboy:

The purpose of this letter is to request that the Mexican Water Chapter of the Navajo Nation

Reservation retain the enclosed documents at the Chapter House for at least sixty (60) days for public

inspection. These documents are the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency’s preliminary decision

for the proposed Clean Air Act Prevention of Significant Deterioration amendment permit for the

McElmo Creek Unit Oil Production Facility on the Navajo Nation Indian Reservation near the city of

Aneth, San Juan County, Utah. These documents are currently available for public comment.

Please contact me at (415) 947-4156 or kelly.shaheerah(~,epa.gov if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Shaheerah Kelly, Environmental Engineer

Permits Office

Air Division

Enclosures
Exhibit 15.6

Andre Deiss

ExplorMine Consultants

20 Villa Grande, Riverside Road, Beverley, Johannesburg

CONSENT OF QUALIFIED PERSON

I, Andre Deiss, consent to the public filing of the technical
report titled The Mineral Resource Estimate for the Merensky and UG2 Reefs for the Ga-Phashsa Project Area, Limpopo Province, Republic of South Africa.

I also consent to any extracts from or a summary of the Technical Report used by Anooraq Resources Corporation.

I certify that I have read all reports being filed by Anooraq Resources Corporation and that they fairly and accurately represents the information in the sections of the Technical Report for which I am
responsible.

DATED the 31stday of March, 2012.



|               
|---------------
|/s/ Andre Deiss
|Andre Deiss
# C_2014039EN.01000702.xml

| 8.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden lodged on 21 November 2013 — Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: Fiscale Eenheid X NV cs

(Case C-595/13)

2014/C 39/12

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant in cassation: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Appellant in cassation:

Other party: Fiscale Eenheid X NV cs

Other party:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth Directive (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a company which has been set up by more than one investor for the sole purpose of investing the assets assembled in immovable property may be regarded as a special investment fund within the meaning of that provision? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth Directive (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a company which has been set up by more than one investor for the sole purpose of investing the assets assembled in immovable property may be regarded as a special investment fund within the meaning of that provision?

1

| 2. | If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative: is Article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth Directive to be interpreted as meaning that the term ‘management’ also covers the actual management of the company’s immovable property, which the company has entrusted to a third party? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative: is Article 13B(d)(6) of the Sixth Directive to be interpreted as meaning that the term ‘management’ also covers the actual management of the company’s immovable property, which the company has entrusted to a third party?

---

(1)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1).

1

---
#### Susan E. Moffitt et al., Appellants, v Kenneth R. Murray, Respondent.

[768 NYS2d 685]—

*1111Kane, J.

Appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court (Moynihan, Jr., J.), entered December 4, 2002 in Warren County, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) from an order of said court, entered March 27, 2003 in Warren County, which, upon reargument, partially adhered to its prior decision.

Plaintiff Susan E. Moffitt (hereinafter plaintiff) and defendant were involved in a motor vehicle accident. The next day, plaintiff complained to her physician of pain in her back, neck and arms. She also visited her dentist, who took X rays which disclosed two fractured teeth. After discovery in this personal injury action, defendant moved for summary judgment alleging that plaintiffs failed to meet the serious injury threshold of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Supreme Court granted the motion. Upon reargument, the court modified its decision by dismissing the complaint with the exception of the portion “seeking damages for the fractured teeth.” Plaintiffs appeal both orders.

Fractured teeth constitute a serious injury *(see Kennedy v Anthony,*195 AD2d 942, 943-944 [1993]). Once a serious injury is established, plaintiff is “entitled to recover any damages proximately caused by the accident” *(Cerniglia v Wisniewski,*267 AD2d 660, 661 [1999]; *see Deyo v Laidlaw Tr.,*285 AD2d 853, 854 [2001]). Thus, the court should not have confined plaintiffs potential recovery to damages related to the fractured teeth.

Mercure, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the orders are modified, on the law, with costs to plaintiffs, by reversing so much thereof as granted any part of defendant’s motion for summary judgment; motion denied in its entirety; and, as so modified, affirmed.
# DLA Commander spreads cheer to the Richmond workforce 

/ Published Dec. 30, 2019
RICHMOND, VA, 
During this time of holiday cheer, many across the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation enterprise took time to give back to their communities or enjoy time with co-workers during office holiday parties. 

DLA Aviation Public Affairs asked you to send us photos and the response was overwhelming. We received dozens of photos showing off creative outfits, office parties, festive office decorations and boxes and boxes of gifts to be donated to those in need in your local communities. 

Over the next couple of weeks, we will be running stories highlighting these photos, so sit back, enjoy and Happy Holidays!!
# C_2014078EN.01000201.xml

| 15.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Polimeles Protodikio Athinon (Greece) lodged on 2 July 2013 — Warner-Lambert Company LLC and Pfizer Ellas AE v SiegerPharma Anonimi Farmakeftiki Etairia

(Case C-372/13)

2014/C 78/02

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Referring court

Polimeles Protodikio Athinon

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Warner-Lambert Company LLC and Pfizer Ellas AE

Applicants:

Defendant: SiegerPharma Anonimi Farmakeftiki Etairia

Defendant:

The Court (Third Chamber) ruled by reasoned order of 30 January 2014.

---
# C_2014078EN.01000202.xml

| 15.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Polimeles Protodikio Athinon (Greece) lodged on 6 August 2013 — Warner-Lambert Company LLC and Pfizer Ellas AE v Minerva Farmakeftiki AE

(Case C-462/13)

2014/C 78/03

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Referring court

Polimeles Protodikio Athinon

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Warner-Lambert Company LLC and Pfizer Ellas AE

Applicants:

Defendant: Minerva Farmakeftiki AE

Defendant:

The Court (Third Chamber) ruled by reasoned order of 30 January 2014.

---
# Columbus handles equipment training

/ Published April 29, 2019
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
In DLA, supporting warfighters means moving their stuff, more often than not. For agency disposal personnel, it often means moving big or awkward items that have become obsolete. But you can’t handle the biggest items without the biggest material handling equipment. And you can’t operate that equipment if you haven’t gotten the most advanced training.

Employees in Columbus are steadily progressing toward earning their advanced level material handling equipment certifications while learning from one of their own colleagues.

Eric Marshall, an Ohio-based property disposal specialist with more than a dozen years’ experience with DLA, has “thousands” of hours operating warehouse equipment. He has served as an MHE instructor for a decade, and in February, he received certification as an advanced level instructor and immediately put that certification to use.

Five Columbus staffers from both the disposition site and the Long Term Storage facility there are already working with Marshall to get their advanced certifications. The training includes eight hours of field work – evaluating heavy equipment types, working with specific machines and learning about the nuances of the vehicles while getting in-seat practice time under the supervisor’s observation. That training is followed by 32 hours of on-the-job time on the machines while working through a checklist.

“It’s always best to have personnel trained up to the highest level,” said Ken Mayle, the LTS site chief and Marshall’s supervisor. He said it was a great thing for the local sites to have a close-by all-level MHE trainer available. “We can conduct training when needed, we don’t have to wait to get it.”    

In addition to ensuring Disposition personnel get trained to the highest level possible, Marshall has been putting in time instructing members of other DLA entities across the installation. He recently helped a dozen DLA Land and Maritime employees either earn their initial MHE licensure or get theirs renewed.

Nate Creech, the MHE program manager for DLA Disposition Services, encouraged all agency drivers to ensure they are using proper risk management in their daily operations.

“Safety is our main concern,” Creech said.  “Folks need to ensure they are qualified and especially licensed on the equipment they operate at their sites. ... We have [instructors] strategically placed throughout the agency.  If any operator needs training, re-training, or has any questions regarding training, they are able to come to us and we will get them the help they need.”
# Petty Officer 2nd Class Miguel Ramirez is awarded the DLA Distribution Material Management Noncommissioned Officer of the Year award

/ Published Oct. 26, 2020
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Hospital Corpsman Petty Officer 2nd Class Miguel Ramirez is awarded the Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Material Management Noncommissioned Officer of the Year award.

Ramirez led a team of four junior sailors in the management of 33,000 Cold Chain Management and classified weapons systems material items worth $8.7 million with 100% accuracy and zero discrepancies.

Operating from DLA Distribution Yokosuka, Japan, Ramirez’s prompt and attentive actions assisted the DDYJ achievement of 98% on time delivery to customers serving in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command region.

Ramirez also spear headed training of military personnel in a wide variety of DLA functions which allowed their team to handle operations while local national workers were out on holiday leave, and maintain regional readiness. His team also distributed flu vaccinations in 2019, ensuring a healthy and ready workforce.

The ability of Ramirez to manage, maintain and handle classified material and orders was invaluable to DLA efforts to support the warfighter always. He took responsibility of his position and, as the only hospital corpsman assigned to DDYJ, performed admirably and outstanding in all initiatives and tasks. His actions are a great credit upon himself, the U.S. Navy, and DLA Distribution as a whole.
# DLA Joint Reserve Force Leaders collaborate to elevate joint logistics

/ Published June 20, 2023
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
Coming together nationwide, Defense Logistics Agency's Joint Reserve Force leaders convened at the McNamara Headquarters Complex for their Annual Leadership Review from June 9-11.

The 3-day gathering aimed to align goals, foster collaboration and enhance the reserve force’s joint logistic capabilities provided to DLA as they support warfighting. DLA senior enlisted leader, Army Command Sgt. Maj. Tomeka O’Neal, kicked off the event by stressing the importance of the JRF and its ability to support the agency.

“When it comes to accomplishing the mission, there’s nothing we can’t do without you all,” said O’Neal. "You have to maintain and be ready to fit in when needed because you are key to this Agency’s continued success moving forward in support of warfighters.”

Whether you’re out in New Mexico, California or Louisiana, we all work together to support DLA, added Army Maj. Gen. Tripp Bowles, DLA JRF director.

“Sometimes large organizations are quick to say no immediately when asked if they can get something done,” said Bowles. “What DLA needs from us is not to say no, but to figure it out. Take the time to figure it out, so we can move quickly and forward to where we need to be.”

As the only event throughout the year that allows the leaders of each major subordinate command to come together, the ALR creates a space for discussion on roles, expectations and realignment towards a common goal. For this year, a primary focus was placed upon setting up the nearly 700 reservists for success through hands-on experience, participation in exercises and professional development.

Bowles emphasized this by pointing out that the collaborative environment makes DLA and the JRF unique. Taking the time to interact, train and learn with other services now contributes to interoperability when the time comes to go downrange and support.

The ALR concluded with the leaders reflecting on the discussions over the weekend and how they can strive together to ensure they get the right resources to the right place and time.

“We learn many valuable lessons with each iteration of our Annual Leadership Review,” said Navy Capt. Onofrio P. Margioni, JRF executive officer and chief of staff. “While this year was by far the best event we’ve had, we still have room to improve to make the event more effective from a joint planning perspective. For next year, we plan to venture into the rich history of the DC area as part of the professional development piece of the ALR.”
No. 09-10751.

#### Joseph Sanchez, Petitioner v. Mike Evans, Warden.

562 U.S. 851, 131 S. Ct. 106,

178 L. Ed. 2d 65,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5947.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Cynthia Thomas, Appellant.

[47 NYS3d 715]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Efman, J.), rendered July 10, 2015, convicting her of grand larceny in the third degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant validly waived her right to appeal (see *People v Sanders,*25 NY3d 337 [2015]; *People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 254 [2006]). The defendant contends that her plea of guilty was not knowing, voluntary, or intelligent because the County Court failed to advise her of all of her constitutional rights under *Boykin v Alabama*(395 US 238 [1969]). Although this contention survives her valid waiver of the right to appeal (see *People v Seaberg,*74 NY2d 1, 10 [1989]; *People v May,*138 AD3d 1146, 1146 [2016]), it is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant failed to move to vacate her plea prior to. the imposition of sentence or otherwise raise the issue before the County Court *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v May,*138 AD3d at 1146; *People v Jackson,*114 AD3d 807, 807 [2014]; *People v Folger,*110 AD3d 736 [2013]). We decline to review this issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction *(see People v Bernardini,*142 AD3d 671 [2016]).

The defendant’s contention that she was improperly adjudicated a second felony offender is precluded by her valid appeal waiver, inasmuch as her challenge goes to the County Court’s compliance with procedures to determine the defendant’s predicate felony status, rather than the legality of the sentence itself *(see People v Hicks,*134 AD3d 854 [2015]).

Leventhal, J.R, Roman, Sgroi and Connolly, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 119 (Monday, June 22, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 33921]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16480]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP98-597-000]


Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

June 16, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 5, 1998, Northwest Pipeline Corporation 
(Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, filed in 
Docket No. CP98-597-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205, 157.211 
and 157.216 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act 
(18 CFR 157.205, 157.211 and 157.216) for approval to partially abandon 
facilities at the Soda Springs Meter Station in Caribou County, Idaho, 
and to construct and operate upgraded replacement facilities at this 
station to accommodate a request for additional delivery capabilities 
under authorized transportation agreements with Intermountain Gas 
Company's affiliate, IGI Resources, Inc., under Northwest's blanket 
certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-433-000 pursuant to Section 7 of 
the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set forth in the request that is 
on file with the Commission and open to public inspection.
    Northwest proposes to upgrade the Soda Springs Meter Station by 
removing the four 2-inch regulators, one 4'' x 8'' relief valve and 
appurtenances and installing two new 3-inch regulators (with 50 percent 
trim), a 6'' x 8'' relief value and appurtenances. Northwest states 
that as a result of this upgrade, the maximum design capacity of the 
meter station will increase from 12,087 Dth per day at 350 psig to 
approximately 17,432 Dth per day at 400 psig. The total cost of the 
proposed facility replacement is estimated to be approximately $58,100, 
which will be reimbursed by Intermountain.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of 
the regulation under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to 
the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, 
the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the 
day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed 
and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a 
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for 
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-16480 Filed 6-18-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M