alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 Rule 10 (Court of Appeals). Affirmance With o ut Opinion. The Court, with the concurrence

of all jduges participating in the case, may affirm the action of the trial court by order without rendering a formal opinion when an opinion would have no precedential value and one or more of the

following circums

tances exist and a

re dispositive of th

e appeal: (1) the Court concurs in the facts as found or as found by necessary implic

ation by the trial c

ourt. (2) there is material evidence to support the verdict of the jury. (3) no reversibl

e error of law a

ppears. Such cases may be

affirmed as foll

ows: “Affirmed in accordance with Court of Appeals Rule 10(a).” 

# FILED

December 28, 1998 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appe llate Court C lerk IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE WESTERN SECTION AT JACKSON

______________________________________________ IN RE: ESTATE OF FROM THE SHELBY COUNTY PURNIE ANN ALLEN, PROBATE COURT, No. B-26326 Deceased, THE HONORABLE LEONARD PIEROTTI, JUDGE AFFIRMED C.A. No. 02A01-9808-PB-00232 C. Michael Robbins of

Memphis William D. Massey o

f Memphis For Appellant, William B. Allen, Sr. R. Michael Potter; Be

th Weems Bradley; Burch, Porter & Johnson of Memphis For Appellee, William B. Allen, Jr.

___________________________________________________________________ _________ MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 AND ORDER

___________________________________________________________________________ CRAWFORD, J. Petitioner, William B. Allen, Sr., a life be nefi ciary of a trust, appeals the order of the Probate Court denying a petition to remove the trustee, respondent, William B. Allen, Jr.. The order appealed de nying th e removal of the trustee also deferred for later consideration a cross petition fi led by the respond

ent-trustee. At t

he time of oral argument, the Courtwas preliminarily of the opinion that the judgment was no t a final judgment a

ppealable
as of right pursuant t

o T.R.A.P. 3. In ret

rospect, howeve

r, we are of the

opinion that probat

e matters because

of their continuing nature can have finality as to various proceedings over the
course of time. Our courts have long established that appeals from orders removing or refusing2

to remove executors or administrators are appealable as in other cases. 2 Jack Robinson, Jr. & Jeff Mobley, Pritchard

on Wills and Administration o f Estates § 616 (5th ed. 1994) ; see In Re Wooten’s Estat e , 114 Tenn. 289, 85 S.W. 1105 (19 05); Rhodes v. Boyer , 106 Tenn. 434, 61 S.W. 776 (1901). As testamentary trustees may be removed by the probate court and occupy a somewhat analogous position t

o executors or a dministrators, this r ule should equally a

pply to trustees. Accor

dingly, we determ

ine that this case i

s properly appea

led to this Court. After careful consideration of the entire record, the judgment is affirm

ed in accordance withCourt of Appeals R ule 10(a). Cos ts of the appeal are assessed to appellant for which execution may issue, if necessary.

_________________________________ W. FRANK CRAWFORD, PRESIDING JUDGE, W.S.

________________

_________________

_ ALAN E. HIGHERS, JUDGE

__________

________________

_______ _ DAVID R. FARMER,

JUDGE
### §7274p. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title XIII, §1305, Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1952, which related to advice to President and Congress regarding safety, security, and reliability of United States nuclear weapons stockpile, was renumbered section 4218 of div. D of Pub. L. 107–314, the Atomic Energy Defense Act, by Pub. L. 112–239, div. C, title XXXI, §3164(a)(1)–(3), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2206, and is classified to section 2538 of Title 50, War and National Defense.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: 

CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION

SECURITIES LITIGATION.

This Document Relates

To All Cases.

 /

No. C 08-01510 WHA

ORDER SETTING

TELEPHONE CONFERENCE

The Court would like to have a short telephone conference with counsel at 9:00 A.M. ON

MONDAY, APRIL 12, 2010. Plaintiff’s counsel are requested to set up the telephone call and then

contact the Court at 415-522-3684 when all parties are present. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 9, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-02878-WHA Document 34 Filed 04/09/10 Page 1 of 1
# Renewal of Trade Agreement with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam

# Memorandum for the United States Trade Representative

Pursuant to my authority under subsection 405(b)(1)(B) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2435(b)(1)(B)), I have determined that actual or foreseeable reductions in U.S. tariffs and nontariff barriers to trade resulting from multilateral negotiations are being satisfactorily reciprocated by the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. I have further found that a satisfactory balance of concessions in trade and services has been maintained during the life of the Agreement on Trade Relations between the United States of America and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. 

                        You are authorized and directed to publish this determination in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                     

[FR Doc. 04-28027

Billing code 3190-W5-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-03-1999
<CASH>                                       1,066,831
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,388,613
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (61,973)
<INVENTORY>                                  4,574,730
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,134,082
<PP&E>                                       7,834,436
<DEPRECIATION>                             (4,226,704)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,100,068
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,495,420
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        52,397
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,458,333
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,100,068
<SALES>                                     25,531,066
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,531,066
<CGS>                                        8,720,478
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,720,478
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            14,117,732
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             365,110
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,327,746
<INCOME-TAX>                                   966,179
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,361,567
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,361,567
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.29


</TABLE>
#### §§ 144.112-144.129 [Reserved]
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 28, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 77758]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-28307]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis 
Panel, RFP SBIR Topic 209--Establishment of Benchmark Data Sets for 
Radiotherapy Quality Assurance.
    Date: February 11, 2005.
    Time: 12 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6130 Executive Blvd., 
Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Kenneth L. Bielat, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer 
Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6116 Executive Boulevard, 
Room 7147, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-7576, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fd9f9498919c8996bd909c9491d3939495d39a928b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8defe4e8e1ecf9e6cde0ece4e1a3e3e4e5a3eae2fb">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS.)
    Dated: December 20, 2004.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 04-28307 Filed 12-27-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-09-01T19:31:31-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2590 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2590

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain filament yarns.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2005

  Mr. Frank of Massachusetts introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain filament yarns.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN FILAMENT YARNS.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.91 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain filament yarns) is 
amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2605 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2605

   To suspend temporarily the duty on Formulations of Difenoconazole/
                               Mefenoxam.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2005

  Mr. Terry introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on Formulations of Difenoconazole/
                               Mefenoxam.

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

SECTION 1. FORMULATIONS OF DIFENOCONAZOLE/MEFENOXAM.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.90.10      Formulations of     Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Difenoconazole                                                     31/2008
                         and Mefenoxam
                         which contain
                         Difenoconazole
                         Technical 1H-
                         1,2,4-triazole, 1-
                         [[2-[2-chloro-4-
                         (4-
                         chlorophenoxy)phe
                         nyl]-4-methyl-1,3-
                         dioxolan-2-
                         yl]methyl]- and
                         Mefenoxam
                         Technical (R,S)-2-
                         [(2,6-
                         dimethylphenyl]-
                         methoxyacetylamin
                         o]-propionic acid
                         methyl ester (CAS
                         Nos. 70630-17-0,
                         69516-34-3, and
                         119446-68-3)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         3808.20.15)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

 v.

MARK GUINN,

Defendant. /

No. CR 09-0414 SI

VERDICT

COUNT 1 – CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE CLEAN WATER ACT

We, the jury, find the defendant Mark Guinn ______________________________________

(Guilty/Not Guilty)

of conspiracy to violate the Clean Water Act, as set forth in Count 1, specifically that Mark Guinn

knowingly and willfully conspired to commit an offense against the United States, namely, to knowingly

discharge or cause the discharge of a pollutant from a point source into waters of the United States

without a permit, with all of us agreeing on at least one overt act committed by a member of the

conspiracy for purposes of carrying out the conspiracy.

COUNT 2 – VIOLATION OF CLEAN WATER ACT

We, the jury, find the defendant Mark Guinn ______________________________________

(Guilty/Not Guilty)

of violating the Clean Water Act, as set forth in Count 2, specifically that on or about April 17, 2003,

Mark Guinn knowingly discharged or caused another to discharge a pollutant, namely dredged spoils,

from a point source into waters of the United States without a permit.

Case 3:09-cr-00414-SI Document 76 Filed 05/10/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

COUNT 3 – VIOLATION OF CLEAN WATER ACT

We, the jury, find the defendant Mark Guinn ______________________________________

(Guilty/Not Guilty)

of violating the Clean Water Act, as set forth in Count 3, specifically that on or about December 22,

2006, Mark Guinn knowingly discharged or caused another to discharge a pollutant, namely dredged

spoils, from a point source into waters of the United States without a permit.

COUNT 4 – VIOLATION OF CLEAN WATER ACT

We, the jury, find the defendant Mark Guinn ______________________________________

(Guilty/Not Guilty)

of violating the Clean Water Act, as set forth in Count 4, specifically that on or about January 7, 2007,

Mark Guinn knowingly discharged or caused another to discharge a pollutant, namely dredged spoils,

from a point source into waters of the United States without a permit.

Date: _________________________

___________________________________

FOREPERSON

Case 3:09-cr-00414-SI Document 76 Filed 05/10/10 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 270 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 270

 To require establishment of an Office of Territorial Affairs in each 
        Executive department and each independent establishment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 6, 2005

 Mrs. Christensen introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                       the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require establishment of an Office of Territorial Affairs in each 
        Executive department and each independent establishment.

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

SECTION 1. REQUIREMENT TO ESTABLISH OFFICE OF TERRITORIAL AFFAIRS.

    (a) Requirement.--The head of each Executive department and of each 
independent establishment shall--
            (1) establish an Office of Territorial Affairs; and
            (2) appoint a Director of the Office of Territorial 
        Affairs, who shall be the head of such office.
    (b) Functions of Director.--The Director shall serve as the liaison 
to the territories with respect to implementation of the programs of 
the Executive department or independent establishment.
    (c) Definitions.--In this section:
            (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means Director of the 
        Office of Territorial Affairs of an Executive department or 
        independent establishment appointed under this section.
            (2) Executive department.--The term ``Executive 
        department'' means each Executive department listed in section 
        101 of title 5, United States Code.
            (3) Independent establishment.--The term ``independent 
        establishment'' has the meaning that term has under section 104 
        of title 5, United States Code,
            (4) Territories.--The term ``territories'' means Guam, the 
        United States Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the 
        Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands.
                                 <all>
```
### §5408. Cooperation by Secretary with public and private agencies

The Secretary is authorized to advise, assist, and cooperate with other Federal agencies and with State and other interested public and private agencies, in the planning and development of—

(1) manufactured home construction and safety standards; and

(2) methods for inspecting and testing to determine compliance with manufactured home standards.

(Pub. L. 93–383, title VI, §609, Aug. 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 704; Pub. L. 96–399, title III, §308(c)(4), Oct. 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 1641.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1980—Pub. L. 96–399 substituted "manufactured home" for "mobile home" in two places.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Section effective upon the expiration of 180 days following Aug. 22, 1974, see section 627 of Pub. L. 93–383, set out as a note under section 5401 of this title.
#### FETT v. GREENSTEIN et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

March 21, 1905.)

Pleadings—Reply—Counterclaim to Counterclaim.

A complaint counted on a breach of contract of employment. The answer counterclaimed for money advanced. The reply alleged the rendition of services to defendants, and asked that the value thereof might be set off against any sum due defendants. *Held,,*that the reply constituted a counterclaim to a counterclaim, and was unauthorized, under Code Civ. Proc. § 514, requiring a reply to a counterclaim to contain denials of the material al legations thereof, or new matter not inconsistent with the complaint, constituting a defense thereto.

Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.

Action by David Fett against Nathan Greenstein and others. From an order denying defendants’ motion to strike out a paragraph of the reply, defendants appeal. Reversed.

Argued before SCOTT, O’GORMAN, and BLANCHARD, JJ.

H. B. Davis, for appellants.

Samuel S. Koenig, for respondent.

BLANCHARD, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion of the defendants to strike out a paragraph of the plaintiff’s reply. The complaint sets forth a breach of contract of employ-, ment. The answer, among other things, sets up a counterclaim of $350 for money advanced. The plaintiff replies that in pursuance of the agreement set forth in the complaint he rendered services to the defendants of the value of $225, and asks that such sum may be set off against any sum that may be found due the defendants on their counterclaim. The defendants moved to strike out this set-off, and from the order denying the said motion this appeal is taken.

The allegation in the reply is a new cause of action by the plaintiff against the defendants for work, labor,, and services performed amounting to the sum of $225. Practically, this is a counterclaim to a counterclaim, and is unauthorized under section 514 of the Code *737of Civil Procedure. The remedy for the plaintiff on receipt of the answer setting up the counterclaim was to move for leave to amend the complaint. A case much in point is Fitzgerald v. Rightmeyer, 12 Mise. Rep. 186, 33 N. Y. Supp. 593.

The order appealed from must be reversed, with costs and disbursements. All concur.
EXHIBIT
32.1





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 Quarterly Report of Pacific Biometrics, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Ronald
R. Helm, Chief Executive Officer, and John P. Jensen, Vice President and
Controller, of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.           the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.





Date:
November 13, 2009





/s/ Ronald R. HelmRonald
      R. Helm,Chief
      Executive Officer/s/ John P. JensenJohn
      P. JensenVice
      President and Controller