NATURE OF ACTION Sample Clauses
NATURE OF ACTION. 1. This is an administrative penalty assessment proceeding brought under Section 16(a) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA or the Act), 15 U.S.C.§ 2615(a), and Sections 22.13(b) and 22.18 of the Consolidated Rules of Practice Governing the Administrative Assessment of Civil Penalties and the Revocation/Termination or Suspension of Permits (Consolidated Rules), as codified at Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Part 22.
2. This Consent Agreement and the attached Final Order shall collectively be referred to as the CAFO.
3. Having found that settlement is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the Act and applicable regulations, the Parties have agreed to settle this action pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 22.18 and consent to the entry of this CAFO without adjudication of any issues of law or fact herein.
NATURE OF ACTION. An Undertaking Agreement placing limitations on the Registrant’s practice centering on a program of mandatory supervision, at the registrants expense, for an agreed period of six (6) months, subject to extension.
NATURE OF ACTION. The registrant, Xxxxx Xxxxxx, voluntarily entered into an undertaking and consent agreement with the Inquiry Committee of the College.
NATURE OF ACTION. 1. This is an administrative penalty assessment proceeding brought under Section 109 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 9609 (CERCLA), and Sections 22.13(b) and 22.18 of the Consolidated Rules of Practice Governing the Administrative Assessment of Civil Penalties and the Revocation/Termination or Suspension of Permits (Consolidated Rules), as codified at Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Part 22.
2. This Consent Agreement and the attached Final Order shall collectively be referred to as the CAFO.
3. Having found that settlement is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the CERCLA and applicable regulations, the Parties have agreed to settle this action pursuant to 40 C.F.R. §
22. 18 and consent to the entry of this CAFO without adjudication of any issues of law or fact herein.
NATURE OF ACTION. 1. This is an administrative penalty assessment proceeding brought under Section 309(g)(2)(B) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1319(g)(2)(B), (“CWA” or the “Act”) and Sections 22.13(b) and 22.18 of the Consolidated Rules of Practice Governing the Administrative Assessment of Civil Penalties and the Revocation/Termination or Suspension of Permits (“Consolidated Rules”), as codified at Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (“C.F.R.”), Part 22.
2. This Consent Agreement and the attached Final Order shall collectively be referred to as the CAFO.
3. Having found that settlement is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the Act and applicable regulations, the Parties have agreed to settle this action pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 22.18 and consent to the entry of this CAFO without adjudication of any issues of law or fact herein.
NATURE OF ACTION. Defendant/Counterclaimant alleges that Plaintiff Counterclaim- Defendant TD Auto Finance, LLC, n/k/a TD Bank, N.A. (“TDAF”) engaged in unlawful acts in connection with the repossession and sale of her Vehicle purchased as part of a consumer transaction in violation of the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”). In particular, Defendant/Counterclaimant alleged that the notices mailed to her before and after the disposition of her Vehicle by TDAF, the “pre-sale notice” and “post-sale notice,” respectively, were misleading or otherwise unreasonable in violation of RSMo § 400.9-611 to § 400.9-616. Defendant/Counterclaimant also alleged that TDAF violated RSMo § 408.553, and therefore the UCC, by charging her interest after default but before a final judgment.
NATURE OF ACTION. Sharp is one of the largest technology companies in the world. It designs, manufactures and sells a variety of technological products, including kitchen appliances such as microwaves.
NATURE OF ACTION. 1. This is an administrative penalty assessment proceeding brought under Section 113(d) of the Clean Air Act (“CAA” or the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 7413(d), and Sections 22.13(b) and 22.18 of the Consolidated Rules of Practice Governing the Administrative Assessment of Civil Penalties and the Revocation/Termination or Suspension of Permits (Consolidated Rules), as codified at Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Part 22.
2. This Consent Agreement and the attached Final Order shall collectively be referred to as the CAFO.
3. Having found that settlement is consistent with the provisions and objectives of the Act and applicable regulations, the Parties have agreed to settle this action pursuant to 40 C.F.R.
NATURE OF ACTION. The Registrant agreed to an Undertaking and Consent Agreement requested by the Inquiry Committee under section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act placing conditions on her practice. The Registrant agreed to meet with a Supervisor selected by the College to review the following issues: (a) Obtaining fully informed consent at the outset of services and at any time that there is a change in the treatment plan or nature of services provided. This includes providing an accurate explanation of treatment options available for the client’s presenting condition and the associated empirical basis for that treatment; (b) Understanding the professional literature with regard to empirically supported treatments; (c) Providing clients with the most efficacious treatment for their presenting concerns before offering an alternative treatment which lacks sufficient empirical basis; (d) Appropriate processing of interpersonal events within the therapeutic relationship; (e) Making referrals to another resource when for any reason it is in the client’s best interests; (f) Understanding client expectations and providing services that are appropriate to the client’s needs; (g) Appropriate termination of the therapeutic relationship; (h) Administrative procedures with regard to scheduling, invoicing, and payment; (i) Only providing services that are within one’s area of expertise; and (j)
NATURE OF ACTION. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants Social Finance, Inc. d/b/a SoFi 19 and SoFi Lending Corp. d/b/a SoFi (together, “SoFi”) engaged in lending discrimination on the 20 basis of alienage or immigration status in violation of federal and California state law by excluding 21 DACA recipients and Conditional Permanent Residents from access to a variety of consumer credit 22 products. 23 SoFi disputes and denies all of Plaintiffs’ claims. SoFi contends that it has fully complied 24 with all applicable laws at issue in this matter.