alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(No. 1135

Claimant awarded $829.50.)

#### Ira Boucher, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed March*29, 1927.

Workmen’s compensation *act*— award *may he made under to State employee.*Where an employee of the State sustains an injury while in the performance of his duty, an award may be made to compensate him under the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation act.

Isaac K. Levy, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General; Frank R. Eagleton, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Chief Justice Clarity

delivered .the opinion of the court:

The claimant was regularly employed by the State of Illinois in the Department of Public Works and Public Buildings, Division of Highways, as a truck driver and had been so employed since October 8, 1926, to the 3rd day of November, 1926. The claimant, as such truck driver on said day, November 3, 1926, was hauling material from the plant to a concrete mixer, and in the course of his employment, his truck backed off the paved roadway and turned over, caught claimant between truck and ground, fracturing and otherwise injuring his right wrist.

It appears from the evidence-in the case, which is uncontradicted and admitted by the Attorney General as the facts, that the cause of said action that claimant was totally incapacitated for 32 weeks, which,- according to his wages and figured under the Workmen’s .Compensation Act, would be $320.00, and that also claimant is entitled to one-fourth of 165 weeks at $10.00 per week for permanent loss of the usé of claimant’s right hand, which amounts to $412.50, and that medical and hospital services would amount to $97.00, making a total claim of $829.50. '

It is therefore recommended by the court that the claimant be awarded the sum of $829.50.
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.711 Imported directly. ( a ) *General.* To be eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the US-JFTA, a good must be imported directly from Jordan into the customs territory of the United States. For purposes of this requirement, the words “imported directly” mean: ( 1 ) Direct shipment from Jordan to the United States without passing through the territory of any intermediate country;
( 2 ) If shipment is from Jordan to the United States through the territory of an intermediate country, the goods in the shipment do not enter into the commerce of the intermediate country and the invoices, bills of lading, and other shipping documents show the United States as the final destination; or
( 3 ) If shipment is through an intermediate country and the invoices and other documents do not show the United States as the final destination, the goods in the shipment are imported directly only if they: ( i ) Remained under the control of the customs authority in the intermediate country;
( ii ) Did not enter into the commerce of the intermediate country except for the purpose of a sale other than at retail, provided that the goods are imported as a result of the original commercial transaction between the importer and the producer or the producer's sales agent; and
( iii ) Have not been subjected to operations other than loading and unloading, and other activities necessary to preserve the goods in good condition.
( b ) *Documentary evidence.* An importer making a claim for preferential tariff treatment under the US-JFTA may be required to demonstrate, to CBP's satisfaction, that the goods were “imported directly” as that term is defined in paragraph (a) of this section. An importer may demonstrate compliance with this section by submitting documentary evidence. Such evidence may include, but is not limited to, bills of lading, airway bills, packing lists, commercial invoices, receiving and inventory records, and customs entry and exit documents.
###### Editorial Note on Part 142

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 142 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93019, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 142.29 Other procedures applicable.

Merchandise released under a special permit for immediate delivery shall be subject to the same procedures applicable to all other imported merchandise, unless specific procedures are set forth in this subpart.
§ 148.18 Failure to declare. ( a ) *Penalty incurred.* Any article in the baggage of a passenger arriving from a foreign country which is not declared as required by this subpart shall be seized if it is available for seizure at the time the violation is detected, and the personal penalty prescribed by section 497, Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1497), shall be demanded from the passenger. If the article is not seized, a claim for the personal penalty shall be made against the person who imported the article without declaration. No duty shall be collected, because undeclared articles are treated as smuggled.
( b ) *Remission of liability.* When an article not declared as required by this subpart is found in the baggage of a person arriving in the United States, the personal penalty and forfeiture may be mitigated or remitted in accordance with the Guidelines for Disposition of Violations of 19 U.S.C. 1497 in the appendix to part 171 of this chapter.
[T.D. 83-145, 48 FR 30100, June 30, 1983]
#### Richard FRYBARGER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jo Anne B. BARNHART,* Commissioner, of Social Security; U.S. Social Security Administrator, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 00-17252.

D.C. No. CV-99-00404-HDM(PHA).

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 2002 **.

Decided May 24, 2002.

Before FERNANDEZ, WARDLAW and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 Jo Anne B. Barnhart is substituted for her predecessor as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM ***

Richard Frybarger appeals the district court’s order granting the Commissioner’s motion to remand for further administrative proceedings in Frybarger’s action challenging the denial of social security disability benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s decision to remand for further proceedings. *Harman v. Apfel,*211 F.3d 1172, 1178 (9th Cir.2000). A district court abuses its discretion when it makes an error of *620law. *Koon v. United States,*518 U.S. 81, 100, 116 S.Ct. 2085, 135 L.Ed.2d 392 (1996). We affirm.

The district court properly remanded for further proceedings because the administrative record was not adequately developed regarding Frybarger’s medical history of chronic fatigue syndrome, and his ability to perform jobs that exist in significant numbers in the national economy. *See Mayes v. Massanari,*276 F.3d 453, 459-60 (9th Cir.2001) (stating that an ALJ has a duty to develop the record further when the evidence is ambiguous or inadequate for a proper evaluation).

Frybarger failed to demonstrate that he was entitled to immediate payment of benefits rather than remand. *See Harman,*211 F.3d at 1178.

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### Vincent Pakulski, an Infant, etc., Respondent, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except Foote, J., who dissented upon the ground that the plaintiff was himself negligent as matter of law,' since there was no emergency, invitation or urgent motive, to excuse his attempt to board defendant’s moving train.
**Exhibit 13.2**

**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 Annual Report on Form 20-F of Distribución y Servicio D&S S.A (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Miguel Núñez Sfeir, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 and 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. |

| By:    | /s/ Miguel Núñez   Sfeir |   |
|--------|------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                                    |   |
| Name   | Miguel Núñez Sfeir       |   |
| Title: | Chief   Financial Officer          |   |
| Date:  | June 30, 2006                      |   |

          This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except as to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

----
NO. 07-07-0280-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL B

	SEPTEMBER 5, 2007

	______________________________

	TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,

										Appellant

	V.

	ROBERT AARON SANCHEZ,

										Appellee

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 111th DISTRICT COURT OF WEBB COUNTY;

	NO. 2004-CVQ-001435-D2; HONORABLE RAUL VASQUEZ, PRESIDING

	_______________________________

	ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

			       _______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. 

	Appellant, by and through its attorney, has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss. Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1)(2) and dismiss the appeal.  Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

							Brian Quinn

						          Chief Justice
PUBLIC MEETING ANNOUNCEMENT 3/12/2001

PURPOSE OF MEETING PUBLIC MEETING

National Materials Program Working

Group Meeting

MEETING LOCATION

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

One White Flint North

11555 Rockville Pike

Rockville, MD 20852-2738

MEETING DATE MEETING ROOM

3/20/2001 8:00 a.m. 5:00 p.m. OWFN 4-B-6

3/21/2001 8:00 a.m. 5:00 p.m. OWFN 4-B-6

2/22/2001 8:00 a.m. 12:00 Noon OWFN 6-B-4

NRC MEETING CONTACT

James Myers Kathaleen Kerr

(301) 415-2328 (301) 415-3340

jhm@nrc.gov kjk@nrc.gov

(301) 415-3502 (Fax) (301) 415-3502 (Fax)

ORGANIZATIONS IN ATTENDANCE

NRC Offices/Regions

Office of State and Tribal Programs (STP)

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS)

Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO)

Office of the General Counsel (OGC)

Region I, Region IV

Outside Participants

Organization of Agreement States (OAS)

Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, Inc. (CRCPD)

/RA/

_____________________________ DATE: March 12, 2001

Frederick C. Combs, Deputy Director

Office of State and Tribal Programs
#### § 18.41 Applicability.

The provisions of §§ 18.41 through 18.45 apply only to merchandise to be exported under cover of a TIR carnet for the convenience of the U.S. exporter or other party in interest and do not apply to merchandise otherwise required to be transported in bond under the provisions of this chapter. Merchandise to be exported under cover of a TIR carnet for the convenience of the U.S. exporter or other party in interest may be transported with the use of the facilities of either bonded or non-bonded carriers.
123456789101112131415161718192021222324A B CDListofAttendeesNAME ORGANIZATION ONPHONE INPERSONLanceCrimmins GlasgowWaterCompany XKellyK.Willmott AMVACChemicalCorporationRobertMichaelsonManitowocPublicUtilitiesWaterDepartmentRobinBolte AlliedUniversalCorporation XMikeWollnerNebraskaFertilizer&ChemicalAssociation XBradleyRogers FutureFuelChemicalCompany XMikeShorts FluidSealingAssociationLyndonDenton ApacheNitrogenProducts,Inc.ThatcherBlockAgCooperativeSafetyDirectorsofIowa XShawnWard CornerstoneChemicalCompany XLowellRandelInternationalAssociationofRefigeratedWarehouses(IARW) XTimBrown/SteveSherk AmericanRefiningCompany XKellyR.Kane SpecialtyPolymers,Inc. XCharlesT.NewellMinnesotaFreezerWarehouseCompany XRaeCronmiller/DorothyKellogNationalRuralElectricCooperativeAssociation XJessMcCluerNationalGrainandFeedAssociation(NGFA) XJohnAugerBrookWarehousingCorporationXEPA'sPanelOutreachMeetingonRiskManagementPlanModernizationRuleNovember19,2015,10:00am‐1:00pm,WJCNorth2530PotentialSmallEntityRepresentatives123456A B CDListofAttendeesNAME ORGANIZATION ONPHONE INPERSONEPA'sPanelOutreachMeetingonRiskManagementPlanModernizationRuleNovember19,2015,10:00am‐1:00pm,WJCNorth25302526272829303132333435363738394041MikeGappKuglerOilCompanyXMattHiteGasProcessorAssociation(GPA)XTimGominiakPerry'sIceCreamCompanyXBrendaSegermanHydriteChemicalsCompanyXChrisWhelandCityofTroyXMichaelWilliamsAgronomyServices,LLPHELPER:EmilyLyonsInternationalDairyFoodsAssociationXHELPER:TheresaForbes/JenniferGibsonNationalAssociationofChemicalDistributorsXHELPER:JavanehNekoomaramAmericanCoatingsAssociationXHELPER:MarkDruexArentFoxHELPER:EdwardFlynnLouisiannaChemicalAssociationXHELPER:KarenHaaseAmericanChemistryCouncilXHELPER:JamieConradSocietyofChemicalManufacturers&Affiliates(SOCMA)XHELPER:KevinMorleyAmericanWaterWorksAssociationXHELPER:LaraSwettAmericanFuelandPetrochemicalManufacturers(AFPM)TabbyWaqarSBAAdvocacyXSBA123456A B CDListofAttendeesNAME ORGANIZATION ONPHONE INPERSONEPA'sPanelOutreachMeetingonRiskManagementPlanModernizationRuleNovember19,2015,10:00am‐1:00pm,WJCNorth2530424344454647484950515253545556575859KevinBrombergSBAAdvocacyXBruceLundegrenSBAAdvocacyXCharlesMarescaSBAAdvocacyXJonathanPoratSBAAdvocacyXDanielleJonesOMBOIRAXNathanFreyOMBXCortneyHigginsOMBOIRABryanLincolnXPaolaArcosXEdBeard XDavidChicca XAmyGraydonXKimJenningsEPA/OSWER/OEMXPattyGioffreEPA/OSWER/OEMXEPAEmployeesOSHADHSOMB123456A B CDListofAttendeesNAME ORGANIZATION ONPHONE INPERSONEPA'sPanelOutreachMeetingonRiskManagementPlanModernizationRuleNovember19,2015,10:00am‐1:00pm,WJCNorth2530606162636465666768697071GerainCoglianoEPA/OSWER/IOXJimBelkeEPA/OSWER/OEMXKathyFranklinEPA/OSWER/OEMXGlennFarberEPA/OP/ORPMXBethBoseckerEPA/OSWER/OEMXCraigMatthiessenEPA/OSWER/OEMXJohnAverbackEPA/OGCXBillNickersonEPA/OP/ORPMXLanelleWigginsEPA/OP/ORPM/RMDXLauraFreeEPA/OP/ORPM/RMDXJonSilbermanEPA/OECAXStaceyYonceEPA/OCFOX
#### E. Carl Schnabel v. American Educational Alliance.

Application denied, with ten dollars costs. Order signed. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
CERTIFICATION OF CEO
               PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                 SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Anthony Paterra as CEO of Diasense, Inc., (the "Company"),
certify, pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

     (1)  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for
       the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003 (the "Report)
       fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
       15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
       or 78o(d); 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/ Anthony Paterra
                                        Anthony Paterra, CEO

                                        January 7, 2005
**Exhibit 21.1**

**List ofSubsidiaries**

NetZero, Inc., a Delaware corporation (also dbaPhotoSite and BlueLight Internet Service)

Juno Online Services, Inc., a Delawarecorporation

Classmates Online, Inc., a Washington corporation

United Online Web Services, Inc., a Delawarecorporation (dba 50 Megs, Bizhosting, Freeservers, Global

Servers and MySite)

United Online Advertising Network, Inc., aDelaware corporation (dba United Online Media Group)

United Online Communications, Inc., a Delawarecorporation (dba NetZero Voice)

Juno Online Services Development Private Limited, acorporation organized under the laws of India

MyPoints.com, Inc., a Delaware corporation

----
#### In re Jerry Wayne SHEPPARD, Petitioner.

No. 01-8001.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 28, 2002.

Decided May 29, 2002.

Jerry Wayne Sheppard, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Jerry Wayne Sheppard has filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining of unreasonable delay in the district court and asking that we compel the district court to act. On June 18, 2001, Sheppard filed a motion to reconsider the denial of his motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001). Although we find the delay is not unreasonable, we deny the petition without prejudice to Sheppard’s right to refile if the district court does not act expeditiously. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED.*
|EXHIBIT 11.0BUILDING
MATERIALS HOLDING CORPORATIONComputation of Earnings Per Share



For the Year Ended December 31,
2002, 2001 and 2000
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                                          | 2002 | 2001             | 2000
|----------------------------------------- | ---- | ---------------- | ----
|COMPUTATION OF BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE   |      |                  |     
|Net income available                      |     
|to common shareholders                    |      | $  7,015,000     |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|Weighted average shares                   |     
|outstanding                               |      | 13,086,371       |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|Basic earnings per share                  |      | $           0.54 |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|COMPUTATION OF DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE |     
|Net income available                      |     
|to common shareholders                    |      | $  7,015,000     |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|Weighted average shares                   |     
|outstanding                               |      | 13,086,371       |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|                                          |     
|Net effect of dilutive                    |     
|stock options based on                    |     
|the treasury stock                        |     
|method using average                      |     
|market price                              |      | 176,445          |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|Total shares outstanding                  |      | 13,262,816       |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|                                          |      |                  |     
|Diluted earnings per share                |      | $           0.53 |     
|                                          |      |                  |     

|67
|--
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-23365-CIV-WILLIAMS

YADER PAVON, el al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CESPEDES REPAIR, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres’ report 

and recommendation (the “Report”) (DE 15) regarding Plaintiffs Yader Pavon, Alison 

Chavez, and David Betancourt’s motion for default judgment against Defendants

Cespedes Repair, Inc. and Jose L. Cespedes (DE 13). The Report recommends that 

Plaintiff’s motion be granted in part and denied in part. No objections to the report were 

filed. Accordingly, upon an independent review of the Report, the record, and applicable 

case law, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The conclusions in the Report (DE 15) are AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. 

2. Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment (DE 13) is GRANTED IN PART AND 

DENIED IN PART.

3. Plaintiffs’ motion for overtime and liquidated damages is GRANTED. Judgment 

is entered in favor of Plaintiff Yader Pavon and against Defendants in the 

amount of $35,719.04. Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff Alison Chavez 

and against Defendants in the amount of $11,364.64. Judgment is entered in 

favor of David Betancourt and against Defendants in the amount of $9,421.72. 

Case 1:20-cv-23365-KMW Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/01/2021 Page 1 of 2
2

4. Plaintiffs’ request for fees and costs is DENIED without prejudice. 

5. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Miami, Florida, this 1st day of April, 2021.

Case 1:20-cv-23365-KMW Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/01/2021 Page 2 of 2
### **CHAPTER 19A—JOHN HEINZ COMPETITIVE EXCELLENCE AWARD**

Sec.
831.
John Heinz Competitive Excellence Award.
#### WELDING SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. THERMAL ENGINEERING INTERNATIONAL (USA) INC. (doing business as Boiler Tube Co. of America), Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 01-1570, 02-1036.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 13, 2002.

Before SCHALL, DYK, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

*Judgment*

PER CURIAM.

*This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:*

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
EXHIBIT 23

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

      We have issued our report dated January 20, 2000, accompanying the
consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report of Bay
Bancshares, Inc. and Subsidiaries on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31,
1999. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the
Registration Statements of Bay Bancshares, Inc. and Subsidiaries on Forms S-8
(File No. 333-76387, effective April 15, 1999 and File No. 333-45583, effective
February 4, 1998).

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
Grant Thornton LLP

Houston, Texas
March 29, 2000
### §1925. Repealed. Pub. L. 111–145, §5(a)(2)(B), Mar. 4, 2010, 124 Stat. 53

Section, Pub. L. 92–51, July 9, 1971, 85 Stat. 130; Pub. L. 93–145, Nov. 1, 1973, 87 Stat. 532; Pub. L. 93–371, §5, Aug. 13, 1974, 88 Stat. 430, related to emergency duty overtime pay from funds disbursed by Secretary of the Senate.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was classified to section 206c of former Title 40, prior to the enactment of Title 40, Public Buildings, Property, and Works, by Pub. L. 107–217, §1, Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1062.