alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 06-407.1 

________________________________________________________________________ 

HEALTH 

 Agreement Between 

the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and SINGAPORE 

Signed at Singapore November 22, 2005 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
SINGAPORE 

Health 

 Agreement signed at Singapore November 22, 2005; 

 Entered into force April 7, 2006.
EXHIBIT 32

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 of Sabine Royalty Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Trust.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., TRUSTEE FOR

SABINE ROYALTY TRUST



|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                                          
|------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------
|                    |  |  | 
|                    |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    Ron E. Hooper                     
|                    |  |  |  |     |  | Ron E. Hooper,                           
|Date: March 1, 2013 |  |  |  |     |  | Senior Vice President, Royalty Management

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Sabine
Royalty Trust and will be retained by Sabine Royalty Trust and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 99.2
                   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 Quarterly  Report of Research
Frontiers Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph
M. Harary, President, Treasurer and Principal Accounting Officer of
the Company, certify,  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), as applicable, 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 results of
     operations of the Company.


/s/ Joseph M. Harary
Joseph M. Harary
President, Treasurer
and Principal Accounting Officer
May 14, 2003
* Pursuant to 5 th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 04-11056

_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee

v. WARREN DOUGLASS COBLE, JR Defendant - Appellant

--------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas, Amarillo

2:04-CR-25-ALL-J

--------------------- Before JONES, BARKSDALE, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. *

PER CURIAM:

IT IS ORDERED that the joint motion of the parties to vacate the appellant’s sentencing is granted.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the joint motion of the parties

to remand the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Amarillo Division for resentencing is granted. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D March 4, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             Dec-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  Jun-30-1998
<CASH>                        1,783,947
<SECURITIES>                  000
<RECEIVABLES>                 000
<ALLOWANCES>                  000
<INVENTORY>                   000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              000
<PP&E>                        000
<DEPRECIATION>                000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                1,783,947
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         1,641,495
<BONDS>                       000
<COMMON>                      000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         000
<PREFERRED>                   000
<OTHER-SE>                    142,452
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  1,783,947
<SALES>                       000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              104,682
<CGS>                         000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              266,883
<LOSS-PROVISION>              000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            000
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (162,201)
<INCOME-TAX>                  (162,201)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (162,201)
<DISCONTINUED>                000
<EXTRAORDINARY>               000
<CHANGES>                     000
<NET-INCOME>                  (162,201)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 (4.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                 (4.71)
        

</TABLE>
# Official Journal L 225/2011

| | ISSN 1725-2555
  doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2011.225.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 225 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5431 August 2011 |

ISSN 1725-2555

doi:10.3000/17252555.L_2011.225.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 225

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5431 August 2011

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 867/2011 of 30 August 2011 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 867/2011 of 30 August 2011 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
# Official Journal C 49E/2014

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.CE2014.049.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 49E |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5721 February 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.CE2014.049.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 49E

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5721 February 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | COUNCIL |
| 2014/C 049E/01 | Position (EU) No 1/2014 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain procedures for applying the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia, of the other partAdopted by the Council on 28 January 2014 | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

COUNCIL

2014/C 049E/01

Position (EU) No 1/2014 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain procedures for applying the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia, of the other partAdopted by the Council on 28 January 2014

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
§ 21.5830 Payment of educational assistance. ( a ) *Timing and release of payments.* VA will pay educational assistance to the individual on the last day of the calendar month during which the individual enters or reenters training. (Authority: 10 U.S.C. 2143)
( b ) *Period covered by payments.* The payments cover those expenses, listed in § 21.5820(a) incurred for the period beginning on the commencing date of the individual's subsistence allowance and ending on the ending date of the individual's subsistence allowance. See § 21.5831.
(Authority: 10 U.S.C. 2143)
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 06-629 

________________________________________________________________________ 

SCIENTIFIC COOPERATION 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and SWEDEN 

Signed at Stockholm June 29, 2006 

with 

Annexes 

 and 

Arrangement Implementing the 

Agreement 

Signed at Stockholm June 28, 2007 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 SWEDEN 

 

 Scientific Cooperation 

 Agreement signed at Stockholm 

 June 29, 2006; 

 Entered into force June 29, 2006. 

 With annexes. 

 And arrangement implementing the agreement. 

 Signed at Stockholm June 28, 2007; 

 Entered into force June 28, 2007. 





NOTE: It is noted that the page numbers for the English Annexes start out of sequ
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6736

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RAMON PACHECO, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge. (CR-99-89, CA-01-690-3) Submitted: September 10, 2001 Decided: September 21, 2001 Before TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ramon Pacheco, Appellant Pro Se. Nicholas Stephan Altimari, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Ramon Pacheco seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant Pacheco’smotion to file a supplemental brief, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Pacheco , Nos. CR-99-89; CA-01-690-3 (E.D. Va. Feb. 15, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Report of the Graduate MedicalEducation National Advisory Committee to the Secretary, Department of Healthand Human Services [electronic resource].**
 
SuDoc Number:HE 20.6002:M 46/4/

Item Number:0507-H-01 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000873212
 
Volumes: 01020304050607
 
April 2, 2020
Order filed February 12, 2013. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-11-00577-CV

____________

TIEN SHAN, INC AND ALPER KARAALI, Appellants

V.

PETROLEUM WHOLESALE, L.P., Appellee

On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2007-46858

ORDER

On January 15, 2013, this court reinstated this appeal after the bankruptcy 

actions filed by both appellants had been dismissed. Appellant Alper Karaali has 

appeared pro se in this appeal. We ordered that unless counsel made an appearance 

on behalf of Tien Shan, Inc., the corporate appellant, on or before January 28, 

2013, the court would dismiss the corporation’s appeal.
2

On January 29, 2013, appellant Alper Karaali filed a pro se brief. Counsel 

has not made an appearance on behalf of Tien Shan, Inc. A corporation is required 

to be represented by a licensed attorney on appeal. See Kunstoplast of Am., Inc. v. 

Formosa Plastics Corp., U.S.A., 937 S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. 1996).

Accordingly, we order the appeal on behalf of the corporation, Tien Shan, 

Inc. DISMISSED. Alper Karaali’s appeal remains pending before the court.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Boyce and Donovan.
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM,

APRIL, 1900.

#### John Petty, Respondent, *v.*John Fish, Appellant.

Appeal from a determination of the General Term of the City Court of the city of Hew York, affirming a judgment of the Trial Term, entered on the verdict of a jury, directed by the court in favor of the plaintiff.

*740August P. Wagener, for appellant.

O. F. Goddard, for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

This is an appeal.from a judgment of the General Term of the Oity Court, affirming a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. Prior to March 1, 1893, the defendant and one William J. Howden were engaged in business as copartners. The plaintiff bought out the interest of the defendant in said copartnership, and continued the' business with Howden, the firm name being Howden & Petty. Plaintiff’s agreement to purchase defendant’s interest, in the firm was embodied in a written instrument, which involved an express guarantee as to the cost price of the stock of goods on hand, and what is claimed to be a guarantee as to the amount of the liabilities of the firm. It is for the breach of these guarantees that the action is brought. We think that although the agreement did not contain the words “ warrant ” or “ guarantee,” with reference to the debts, it was in fact as to these debts a guarantee that they did not exceed the sum stated in the agreement. No particular phraseology is necessary to constitute a warranty, if it be an assertion upon which the vendee relies and which is designed to be a positive assertion and not the expression of an opinion. Fairbank Canning Co. v. Metzger, 118 N. Y. 265. The other exceptions taken by appellant present no question requiring the reversal of the judgment.

Present: Teuax, P. J., Scott and Dugbo, JJ.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
#### Isaac Ravin, Respondent, *v.*Jacob Subin, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the City Court of the city of New York, affirming a judgment entered upon a verdict rendered in said court in favor of the plaintiff.

Louis Levy, for appellant.

Leon B. Ginsburg (William L. Mathot, of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The defendant is a city marshal, and had in his hands a warrant of attachment issued against one Aaxonson, under which he made a levy upon certain goods, which, however, the plaintiff in this action claimed as his property. The defendant refused to recognize such claim, and* this action was thereupon brought to recover damages as for a conversion. Upon the trial the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $175. An appeal was taken from the judgment entered thereon to the General Term of the City Court, where the judgment was affirmed, and from such judgment of affirmance an appeal has been taken to this court.

The only proof of value with respect to the goods that had in any way been given when the plaintiff rested is found in the testimony of the plaintiff himself, who, when asked what such value was, said “ I could not tell you exactly; I think it was worth about $275.” The record shows, however, that he was clearly not qualified as an expert to give any testimony whatsoever upon the subject. He states that before October 3, 1895, when the alleged conversion took place, he was a peddler of jewelry, and had not been in the grocery business before that time, but had had some experience in that line in Europe. Counsel for the defendant properly objected to this proof, and when it had been admitted *743over his objection, moved to strike it out. The defendant as a part of his case put on the witness-stand a person who was clearly-qualified to testify upon the question of value, who stated that the value of the property in question at the time of the levy was from $100 to $120, adding that it was the highest price. These two items of evidence constitute substantially all the proof that was offered upon the trial on this question. The trial justice in his charge called the attention of the jury to the testimony given by these two witnesses, stating that if they believed the plaintiff should recover at all, it would be for them to say, *“*as between these figures of $100 and $275, what was the actual amount taken by the marshal, and for which sum he should recover.” As the jury rendered a verdict for $175, it is obvious that they considered and were influenced by the estimate of value to which the plaintiff was allowed to testify over the objection of the defendant. The error, then, in the admission of this evidence was obviously prejudicial to the defendant, and calls for a reversal of the judgment.

The disposition which we have made of the case renders it unnecessary to consider the other exceptions which have been discussed by counsel.

Present: Beekmah, P. J., Giegebich and O’Gobmah, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 243 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 243

 To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide for the payment of 
  Combat-Related Special Compensation to members of the Armed Forces 
   retired for disability with less than 20 years of active military 
               service who were awarded the Purple Heart.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 5, 2007

    Mr. Weller of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide for the payment of 
  Combat-Related Special Compensation to members of the Armed Forces 
   retired for disability with less than 20 years of active military 
               service who were awarded the Purple Heart.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Combat Military Medically Retired 
Veteran's Fairness Act''.

SEC. 2. EXCEPTION TO 20-YEAR SERVICE REQUIREMENT FOR MEMBERS AWARDED 
              THE PURPLE HEART.

    (a) Entitlement.--Section 1413a of title 10, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) in subsection (c), by inserting ``Generally'' after 
        ``Retirees'';
            (2) by redesignating subsections (d) through (i) as 
        subsections (e) through (j), respectively; and
            (3) by inserting after subsection (c) the following new 
        subsection (d):
    ``(d) Exception to 20-Year Service Requirement for Purple Heart 
Recipients.--In addition to members described in subsection (c), a 
member of the uniformed services retired under chapter 61 of this title 
with less than 20 years of service creditable under section 1405 of 
this title is an eligible combat-related uniformed services retiree for 
the purposes of subsection (a) if the member has a combat-related 
disability that is attributable to an injury for which the member was 
awarded the Purple Heart. The determination under subsection (b) of the 
amount of compensation to be paid to such a member shall be made 
without regard to paragraph (3) of such subsection.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (d) of section 1413a of title 10, 
United States Code, as added by subsection (a)(3), shall apply with 
respect to payments of compensation under such section for months 
beginning on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.4

                            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 Tofutti Brands Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 29, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steven Kass, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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.


/s/Steven Kass*
---------------
Steven Kass
Chief Financial Officer
May 13, 2003



* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.