Nathan Freeman v. Mediterranean Shipping Co. S.A. and Shipco Transport, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Complaint and Assignment, 13002-13003 [E8-4860]

Download as PDF 13002 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 11, 2008 / Notices FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION Proposal To Renew the Following Currently Approved Collections of Information Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request 1. Title: Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements in Connection with Regulation Z (Truth in Lending). OMB Number: 3064–0082. Frequency of Response: On occasion. Affected Public: State nonmember banks that regularly offer or extend consumer credit. Estimated Number of Respondents: 5,200. Estimated Time per Response: 491.11 hours. Total Annual Burden: 2,553,775 hours. General Description of Collection: Regulation Z (12 CFR 226), issued by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, prescribes uniform methods of computing the cost of credit, disclosure of credit terms, and procedures for resolving billing errors on certain credit accounts. 2. Title: Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements in Connection with Regulation M (Consumer Leasing). OMB Number: 3064–0083. Frequency of Response: On occasion. Affected Public: State nonmember banks engaging in consumer leasing. Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,000. Estimated Time per Response: 75 hours. Total Annual Burden: 150,000 hours. General Description of Collection: Regulation M (12 CFR 213), issued by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, implements the consumer leasing provisions of the Truth in Lending Act. 3. Title: Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements in Connection with Regulation B (Equal Credit Opportunity). OMB Number: 3064–0085. Frequency of Response: On occasion. Affected Public: State nonmember banks engaging in credit transactions. Estimated Number of Respondents: 5,200. Estimated Time per Response: 135.16 hours. Total Annual Burden: 702,832 hours. General Description of Collection: Regulation B (12 CFR 202), issued by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, prohibits creditors from discriminating against applicants on any of the bases specified by the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, establishes guidelines for gathering and evaluating credit information, and requires creditors to give applicants a written notification of rejection of an application. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). ACTION: Notice of information collection to be submitted to OMB for review and approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. AGENCY: SUMMARY: In accordance with requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the FDIC hereby gives notice that it plans to submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for OMB review and renewal of three information collections titled: (1) Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements in Connection with Regulation Z (Truth in Lending); (2) Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements in Connection with Regulation M (Consumer Leasing); and (3) Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements in Connection with Regulation B (Equal Credit Opportunity). Comments must be submitted on or before April 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments to the FDIC by any of the following methods. All comments should refer to the name of the collection as well as the OMB control number(s): • https://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/ laws/federal/notices.html. • E-mail: comments@fdic.gov Include the name of the collection in the subject line of the message. • Mail: Leneta G. Gregorie (202–898– 3719), Counsel, Room F–1064, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20429. • Hand Delivery: Comments may be hand-delivered to the guard station at the rear of the 17th Street Building (located on F Street), on business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Comments may also be submitted to the OMB desk officer for the FDIC: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. Submissions to the OMB may also be faxed to (202) 395–6974. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leneta Gregorie, at the address identified above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: yshivers on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES DATES: VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:44 Mar 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Request for Comment Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the FDIC’s functions, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the estimates of the burden of the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. At the end of the comment period, the comments and recommendations received will be analyzed to determine the extent to which the collection should be modified prior to submission to OMB for review and approval. Comments submitted in response to this notice also will be summarized or included in the FDIC’s requests to OMB for renewal of these collections. All comments will become a matter of public record. Dated at Washington, DC, this 6th day of March, 2008. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E8–4756 Filed 3–10–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714–01–P FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION [Docket No. 08–01] Nathan Freeman v. Mediterranean Shipping Co. S.A. and Shipco Transport, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Complaint and Assignment Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal Maritime Commission (‘‘Commission’’) by Nathan Freeman. Complainant asserts that he is an individual residing in New York, New York. Complainant alleges that Respondent, Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. (‘‘MSC’’), is an ocean common carrier with an office in New York, New York, and that Respondent, Shipco Transport, Inc. (‘‘Shipco’’), is a non-vessel-operating common carrier with offices in Bayonne, New Jersey and North Charleston, South Carolina. Complainant asserts that he engaged a freight forwarder to arrange for the transportation of a shipment consisting of two containers of scrap plastic, and that the forwarder engaged Respondent Shipco to carry such shipment from Jacksonville, Florida to the port of E:\FR\FM\11MRN1.SGM 11MRN1 yshivers on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 11, 2008 / Notices Cotonou, Benin. Complainant also asserts that Shipco, in turn, arranged with Respondent MSC to carry Complainant’s shipment. Complainant avers that his shipment arrived at the port of Cotonou, Benin on or about July 6, 2006. Complainant claims that, from approximately June 2006 to November 2006, his customs broker in Cotonou and Complainant’s wife, Christiane Freeman, the designated consignee of the shipment and resident of Cotonou, made numerous demands to Respondents and their agents to provide the original bill of lading for Complainant’s shipment. Complainant contends that Respondents refused to issue the original bill of lading. Complainant Freeman asserts that the port of Cotonou officials require production of an original bill of lading prior to releasing the shipment to Complainant, his wife, or his customs broker, and that Respondents knew, or should have known, of this requirement. Complainant also asserts that MSC wrongfully claimed that Complainant owed MSC approximately $20,000 for demurrage charges in connection with Complainant’s shipment and that MSC refused to release the shipment unless payment of the alleged demurrage was made. Complainant claims that, in November 2006, the port of Cotonou customs officials ‘‘confiscated and seized’’ Complainant’s shipment due to Complainant’s inability to acquire from Respondents the original bill of lading necessary to take possession of the shipment. Complainant alleges that Respondents violated the Shipping Act of 1984 (‘‘the Shipping Act’’) by refusing to issue an original bill of lading to Complainant thereby preventing Complainant from taking possession of the shipment, and that Respondents’ refusal directly caused Complainant’s loss of his entire shipment and property. Complainant also alleges that Respondents ‘‘unreasonably, fraudulently and deceitfully attempted to extort alleged demurrage charges’’ from Complainant in January 2007, even though Respondents knew, or should have known, that the shipment had been previously confiscated by the port of Cotonou customs officials. Complainant asserts that the foregoing activities by Respondents constitute an unreasonable practice related to the delivery of property in violation of 46 U.S.C. 41102(c) (formerly § 10(d)(1) of the Shipping Act). Complainant claims that he has been injured and damaged in the sum of $80,000.00 for the value of the property of the shipment and seeks this amount as reparations, or in the event of VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:03 Mar 10, 2008 Jkt 214001 insufficient evidence of such loss, seeks $21,367.00 as reimbursement of ocean freight, other shipment charges, and cost of the property. Complainant also seeks an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and punitive damages, to be determined by the Commission, for the willful, wrongful, and illegal conduct of Respondents in their refusal to issue an original bill of lading and release Complainant’s property. Complainant requests that the Commission require Respondents to: (1) Answer the charges in the subject complaint; (2) cease and desist from the aforesaid violation of the Shipping Act; (3) establish and put in force such practices as the Commission determines to be lawful and reasonable; and (4) pay to Complainant by way of reparations the sum of $80,000.00 with interest, attorney’s fees and punitive damages, or such other sum as the Commission determines. Additionally, Complainant requests that the Commission issue further order(s) as it determines to be proper. This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of Administrative Law Judges. Hearing in this matter, if any is held, shall commence within the time limitations prescribed in 46 CFR 502.61, and only after consideration has been given by the parties and the presiding officer to the use of alternative forms of dispute resolution. The hearing shall include oral testimony and crossexamination in the discretion of the presiding officer only upon proper showing that there are genuine issues of material fact that cannot be resolved on the basis of sworn statements, affidavits, depositions, or other documents or that the nature of the matter in issue is such that an oral hearing and crossexamination are necessary for the development of an adequate record. Pursuant to the further terms of 46 CFR 502.61, the initial decision of the presiding officer in this proceeding shall be issued by March 5, 2009, and the final decision of the Commission shall be issued by July 3, 2009. Karen V. Gregory, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E8–4860 Filed 3–10–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6730–01–P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank Holding Companies The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 13003 § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than March 26, 2008. A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Todd Offenbacker, Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198–0001: 1. Steven Craig Baggerly, individually, as co–trustee of the Max Baggerly Marital Trust and as trustee of the Employee Stock Ownership Plan for Employees of Bank of the Panhandle; the Max Baggerly Trust, all of Guymon, Oklahoma, together with Karen Ann Baggerly, Lubbock, Texas, Marc Lee Williamson and Camille Kay Williamson, both of Fredericksburg, Texas; all as a group acting in concert, to acquire control of Panhandle Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire control of Bank of the Panhandle, both in Guymon, Oklahoma. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 6, 2008. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E8–4774 Filed 3–10–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210–01–S FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Sunshine Act Meeting Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. TIME AND DATE: 12:00 p.m., Monday, March 17, 2008. PLACE: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, 20th and C Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551. STATUS: Closed. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 1. Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal Reserve System employees. 2. Any items carried forward from a previously announced meeting. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Smith, Director, or Dave AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: E:\FR\FM\11MRN1.SGM 11MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 48 (Tuesday, March 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13002-13003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-4860]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

[Docket No. 08-01]


Nathan Freeman v. Mediterranean Shipping Co. S.A. and Shipco 
Transport, Inc.; Notice of Filing of Complaint and Assignment

    Notice is given that a complaint has been filed with the Federal 
Maritime Commission (``Commission'') by Nathan Freeman. Complainant 
asserts that he is an individual residing in New York, New York. 
Complainant alleges that Respondent, Mediterranean Shipping Company 
S.A. (``MSC''), is an ocean common carrier with an office in New York, 
New York, and that Respondent, Shipco Transport, Inc. (``Shipco''), is 
a non-vessel-operating common carrier with offices in Bayonne, New 
Jersey and North Charleston, South Carolina.
    Complainant asserts that he engaged a freight forwarder to arrange 
for the transportation of a shipment consisting of two containers of 
scrap plastic, and that the forwarder engaged Respondent Shipco to 
carry such shipment from Jacksonville, Florida to the port of

[[Page 13003]]

Cotonou, Benin. Complainant also asserts that Shipco, in turn, arranged 
with Respondent MSC to carry Complainant's shipment. Complainant avers 
that his shipment arrived at the port of Cotonou, Benin on or about 
July 6, 2006. Complainant claims that, from approximately June 2006 to 
November 2006, his customs broker in Cotonou and Complainant's wife, 
Christiane Freeman, the designated consignee of the shipment and 
resident of Cotonou, made numerous demands to Respondents and their 
agents to provide the original bill of lading for Complainant's 
shipment. Complainant contends that Respondents refused to issue the 
original bill of lading.
    Complainant Freeman asserts that the port of Cotonou officials 
require production of an original bill of lading prior to releasing the 
shipment to Complainant, his wife, or his customs broker, and that 
Respondents knew, or should have known, of this requirement. 
Complainant also asserts that MSC wrongfully claimed that Complainant 
owed MSC approximately $20,000 for demurrage charges in connection with 
Complainant's shipment and that MSC refused to release the shipment 
unless payment of the alleged demurrage was made. Complainant claims 
that, in November 2006, the port of Cotonou customs officials 
``confiscated and seized'' Complainant's shipment due to Complainant's 
inability to acquire from Respondents the original bill of lading 
necessary to take possession of the shipment.
    Complainant alleges that Respondents violated the Shipping Act of 
1984 (``the Shipping Act'') by refusing to issue an original bill of 
lading to Complainant thereby preventing Complainant from taking 
possession of the shipment, and that Respondents' refusal directly 
caused Complainant's loss of his entire shipment and property. 
Complainant also alleges that Respondents ``unreasonably, fraudulently 
and deceitfully attempted to extort alleged demurrage charges'' from 
Complainant in January 2007, even though Respondents knew, or should 
have known, that the shipment had been previously confiscated by the 
port of Cotonou customs officials. Complainant asserts that the 
foregoing activities by Respondents constitute an unreasonable practice 
related to the delivery of property in violation of 46 U.S.C. 41102(c) 
(formerly Sec.  10(d)(1) of the Shipping Act).
    Complainant claims that he has been injured and damaged in the sum 
of $80,000.00 for the value of the property of the shipment and seeks 
this amount as reparations, or in the event of insufficient evidence of 
such loss, seeks $21,367.00 as reimbursement of ocean freight, other 
shipment charges, and cost of the property. Complainant also seeks an 
award of reasonable attorney's fees and punitive damages, to be 
determined by the Commission, for the willful, wrongful, and illegal 
conduct of Respondents in their refusal to issue an original bill of 
lading and release Complainant's property.
    Complainant requests that the Commission require Respondents to: 
(1) Answer the charges in the subject complaint; (2) cease and desist 
from the aforesaid violation of the Shipping Act; (3) establish and put 
in force such practices as the Commission determines to be lawful and 
reasonable; and (4) pay to Complainant by way of reparations the sum of 
$80,000.00 with interest, attorney's fees and punitive damages, or such 
other sum as the Commission determines. Additionally, Complainant 
requests that the Commission issue further order(s) as it determines to 
be proper.
    This proceeding has been assigned to the Office of Administrative 
Law Judges. Hearing in this matter, if any is held, shall commence 
within the time limitations prescribed in 46 CFR 502.61, and only after 
consideration has been given by the parties and the presiding officer 
to the use of alternative forms of dispute resolution. The hearing 
shall include oral testimony and cross-examination in the discretion of 
the presiding officer only upon proper showing that there are genuine 
issues of material fact that cannot be resolved on the basis of sworn 
statements, affidavits, depositions, or other documents or that the 
nature of the matter in issue is such that an oral hearing and cross-
examination are necessary for the development of an adequate record. 
Pursuant to the further terms of 46 CFR 502.61, the initial decision of 
the presiding officer in this proceeding shall be issued by March 5, 
2009, and the final decision of the Commission shall be issued by July 
3, 2009.

Karen V. Gregory,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-4860 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P