alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2015346EN.01001801.xml

| 19.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 346/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 346/18

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2015 — Samsung SDI and Others v Commission

(Case T-84/13) (1)

1

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Global market for cathode ray tubes for television sets and computer monitors - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Agreements and concerted practices on pricing, market sharing, capacity and production - Single and continuous infringement - Duration of the infringement - Cooperation during the administrative procedure - 2006 Leniency Notice - Reduction of the fine - Calculation of the fine - Taking account of undertakings’ sales according to the place of delivery - Taking account of the average value of sales recorded during the infringement period))

(2015/C 346/20)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Samsung SDI Co. Ltd (Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea); Samsung SDI Germany GmbH (Berlin, Germany); and Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Bhd (Negeri Sembilan Darul Khusus, Malaysia) (represented initially by G. Berrisch, lawyer, D. Hull, Solicitor, and L.-A. Grelier, lawyer, then by D. Hull and L.-A. Grelier, and subsequently by L.-A. Grelier, D. Geradin, J. Ysewyn, P. Camesasca, lawyers, and J. Flynn QC)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Biolan, G. Meessen and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2012) 8839 final of 5 December 2012 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.437 — TV and Computer Monitor Tubes) and for a reduction of the fines imposed on the applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action in so far as it concerns Samsung SDI Germany GmbH; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action in so far as it concerns Samsung SDI Germany GmbH;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders Samsung SDI Co. Ltd and Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Bhd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Samsung SDI Co. Ltd and Samsung SDI (Malaysia) Bhd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 108, 13.4.2013.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 122 (Thursday, June 25, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34630-34631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16864]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce (DOC) has submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for 
collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
    Title: Northeast Region Logbook Family of Forms.
    Agency Form Number: NOAA 88-30 and 88-140.
    OMB Approval Number: 0648-0212.
    Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.
    Burden: 6,348 hours.
    Number of Respondents: 5,875 with multiple responses.
    Avg. Hours Per Response: 5 minutes for vessel logbooks and 12.5 
minutes for shellfish logbooks. These estimates do not include the time 
for entries that respondents would make to their own logbooks as normal 
business practice.
    Needs and Uses: Under the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act, the Regional Fishery Management Councils have developed 
fishery management plans to conserve and manage marine resources in the 
exclusive economic zone. Participants in the summer flounder, scup, 
black seas, bass, Northeast multispecies, Atlantic sea scallop, 
Atlantic mackerel, squid, butterfish or surf clam and ocean quahog 
fisheries in the Northeast must submit logbooks containing catch and 
effort data about their fishing trips. The information is used in the 
development of management measures to control fishing effort, as well 
as to enforce the measures once they are in effect.
    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit organizations.
    Frequency: Weekly, monthly.
    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
    OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, (202) 395-3897.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, DOC Forms Clearance Officer, 
(202) 482-3272, Department of Commerce, Room 5327, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent to David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, Room 
10202, New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, 
DC 20503.


[[Page 34631]]


    Dated: June 18, 1998.
Linda Engelmeier,
Departmental Forms Clearance Officer, Office of Management and 
Organization.
[FR Doc. 98-16864 Filed 6-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
2017-0265.

#### Moore Law Firm v. Singh.

Butler App. No. CA2016-01-016, 2017-Ohio-54.
No. 09-1421.

#### Ralph T. Byrd, Petitioner v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P., et al.

562 U.S. 833, 131 S. Ct. 122,

178 L. Ed. 2d 32,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6456.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland denied.

*33Same case below, 187 Md. App. 719 and 187 Md. App. 734.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Chirse, Appellant.

[55 NYS3d 430]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garnett, J.), rendered February 14, 2013, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Ingram, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification evidence. The failure of the police to take a photograph of the lineup created a presumption of suggestiveness *(see People v Brennan,*222 AD2d 445 [1995]; *People v Simmons,*158 AD2d 950, 950 [1990]). However, the People rebutted the presumption of suggestiveness by other testimony and evidence including photographs of four fillers taken on the day of the lineup and testimony as to the physical attributes of and clothing worn by the participants. This evidence demonstrated that the procedures used were not impermissibly suggestive *(see People v Pitts,*46 AD3d 923, 923 [2007]; *People v Brennan,*222 AD2d at 445; *People v Simmons,*158 AD2d at 950). Further, contrary to the defendant’s contention, the People did present evidence *738at the suppression hearing that the identifying witness, a police officer, viewed the defendant’s face on the day of the robbery. Moreover, the defendant’s contention that the lineup procedure may have been tainted by communications between the identifying witness and his fellow officers prior to the lineup is purely speculative *(see People v Chipp,*75 NY2d 327, 339 [1990]). The defendant’s remaining contentions with respect to the suppression determination are without merit.

The defendant contends that the conviction was against the weight of the evidence. In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]; *People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the factfinder’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor *(see People v Mateo,*2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; *People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The defendant’s contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is without merit *(see Strickland v Washington,*466 US 668, 694 [1984]; *People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137 [1981]). Counsel is not ineffective for failing to make a motion or argument that had little or no chance of success *(see People v Ennis,*11 NY3d 403, 415 [2008]; *People v Cromwell,*99 AD3d 1017, 1017 [2012]; *People v Brown,*92 AD3d 455, 456 [2012]; *People v Mack,*91 AD3d 794, 795 [2012]).

Hall, J.P., Sgroi, Maltese and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA SUPREME COURT CAUSE NO. DA 23
- 0393

____________________________________ STATE OF MONTANA )

Pl aint iff ) ) ORDER TO EXTEND vs. ) THE DEADLINE FOR ) REPLY BRIEF JUSTIN KALINA, ) ) Defendant. ) Upon considerat io n of Defendant’s motion for an extension o f th e deadline to file the Reply Brief in this matter, and good cause therefrom; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is GRAN TED. Appellant shall file the reply br ief on or before March 11, 2024. No f urther extensio ns will be granted.

ELECTRONICALLY SIGNED AND DATED BELOW.

cc: At torney

General Jami Rebso m

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 26 2024

02/26/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0393
EXHIBIT 31.2
RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Sheldon C. Fenton certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of VeridienCorporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the smallbusiness issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the smallbusiness issuer and have:
 a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the smallbusiness issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during the periodin which this report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small businessissuer’s fourth physical quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.
5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the auditcommittee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):
 a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal controls over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the smallbusiness issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: November 15,2004       /s/ Sheldon C. Fenton   Sheldon C. Fenton Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2566 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2566

To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 
 revise the Safer Choice Standard to provide for a Safer Choice label 
for pots, pans, and cooking utensils that do not contain PFAS, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 7, 2019

   Mr. Soto introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 
 revise the Safer Choice Standard to provide for a Safer Choice label 
for pots, pans, and cooking utensils that do not contain PFAS, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SAFER CHOICE LABEL FOR POTS, PANS, AND COOKING UTENSILS.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment 
of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 
shall revise the Safer Choice Standard of the Safer Choice Program to 
identify the requirements for a pot, pan, or cooking utensil to meet in 
order to be labeled with a Safer Choice label, including a requirement 
that any such pot, pan, or cooking utensil does not contain any PFAS.
    (b) Definition.--In this Act, the term ``PFAS'' means a 
perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substance with at least one fully 
fluorinated carbon atom.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 16 (Monday, January 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3743-3744]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1674]


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

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB 
Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

ACTION: Notice of information collection to be submitted to OMB for 
review and approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the FDIC hereby gives notice that it 
plans to submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request 
for OMB review and approval of the information collection system 
described below.

    Type of Review: New collection.
    Title: Occasional Qualitative Surveys.
    OMB Number: New collection, number not yet assigned.
    Annual Burden:
Estimated annual number of respondents: 5,000.
Estimated time per response: 1 hour.
Average annual burden hours: 5,000 hours.

    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Washington, DC 20503.
    FDIC Contact: Tamara R. Manly, (202) 898-7453, Office of the 
Executive Secretary, Room F-4022, Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20429.
    Comments: Comments on this collection of information are welcome 
and should be submitted on or before [insert date 30 days after date of 
publication in the Federal Register] to both the OMB reviewer and the 
FDIC contact listed above.

ADDRESSES: Information about this submission, including copies of the 
proposed collection of information, may be obtained by calling or 
writing the FDIC contact listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The collection involves the occasional use 
of qualitative surveys to gather anecdotal information about regulatory 
burden, problems or successes in the bank supervisory process 
(including both safety-and-soundness and consumer-related exams), and 
similar concerns.

    Dated: January 20, 1998.


[[Page 3744]]


Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-1674 Filed 1-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-M
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

JOHN W. BROTHERTON, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. )

) Case No. 2D16-4463

DEPT. OF REVENUE, O/B/O WINEEN )

ANN BROTHERTON, ) 

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed January 30, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas 

County; Thomas M. Ramsberger, Judge.

Laura A. Olson of The Law Office of Laura 

A. Olson, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant.

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, Carrie R. McNair, Assistant 

Attorney General, and Toni C. Bernstein, 

Tallahassee (substituted as counsel of 

record), for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

KHOUZAM, SLEET, and BADALAMENTI JJ., Concur.
# DLA Distribution San Joaquin California assists national fire readiness

/ Published Sept. 7, 2022
TRACY, Calif., TRACY, Calif.
With thousands of fires affecting millions of acres in the western coast of the United States every year, the Defense Logistics Agency Distribution San Joaquin, California, fire mission is essential to supporting firefighters across North America.

In 2014, DDJC assumed responsibility of the fire mission from the General Services Administration to consolidate governmental efforts. Today, DDJC supplies the US Forest Service across the entire United States and works closely with local state agencies, like Cal Fire, to provide equipment and high priority requests based on real time requirements to fight fires.

Kevin Cabral, the DLA Fire Mission supervisor in San Joaquin, says he loves being able to help firefighters all over the United States with such a vital mission.

“Our orders are based off real-world needs,” Cabral said. “Our incident management teams communicate with the US Forest Service and Cal Fire to understand what supplies fire crews need to sustain the firefighting effort.”

Hoses, shovels, batteries, food, uniforms and hundreds of other wildland fire support items are delivered to fire caches across the nation every week. During the fire season and times of high priority, DDJC’s fire mission team works 24/7 to ensure that the fire caches are filled with the supplies necessary for firefighters to do their jobs.

“Here at DDJC, we always keep an eye on the USDA Fire Map to best prepare for incoming requests from our partners,” Cabral said. “I speak with our mission partners every week to ensure that the fire caches are filled with the necessary inventory to keep the firefighters going.”

As fires continue to rage through the Southern Oregon and Northern California border, DDJC has continually supplied the local fire caches with key supplies and firefighting equipment.

“In this quarter alone, we have shipped 8 truckloads of firefighting equipment to our Redmond, Oregon, and Redding, California, Fire Caches,” Cabral said. “We are in an expedited work posture for the entire official fire season, from May 1 to October 31. Our team is on call and prepared to process any material to the respective caches during this timeframe.”

Marine Col. Kevin Chunn, commander of DDJC, also stated his appreciation regarding this mission.

“Our ability to provide firefighters with the right gear at the right time and place is one of the many things that makes DDJC a vital distribution center,” Chunn said. “The DLA fire mission here at DDJC is a perfect example of how we faithfully and reliably support our nation, abroad and at home.”

DDJC’s fire mission team will continue to stock fire caches across the mainland, Alaska and Hawaii in support of the firefighter.
Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement



 Exhibit 10.9 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
  
 Amendment No. 1, dated as of September 22, 2004, between AnnTaylor Stores Corporation (the “Company”) and
Katherine Lawther Krill (the “Executive”), amending the Employment Agreement between the Company and the Executive, dated as of January 29, 2004 (the “Employment Agreement”). 
  

	1.	The proviso at the end of Section 7(c) of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 

  
 “; provided such injunctive relief may only be sought for competitive
activity under Section (b) above if such activity occurs during employment or after Executive’s dismissal for Cause or Executive voluntarily terminates her employment without Good Reason.” 
  

	2.	All capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Employment Agreement. 

  

	3.	Except as expressly provided in this Amendment No. 1, the terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date
first written above. 
  

			
	 ANNTAYLOR STORES CORPORATION

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ J. Patrick Spainhour


	 	 	 J. Patrick Spainhour

	 	 	 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

		
	 	 	 /s/ Katherine Lawther Krill


	 	 	 Katherine Lawther Krill