alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(R.D. 11418)

#### Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided December 12, 1967)

*Sharp, Solter & Hutchison*for the plaintiff.

*Edwin L. Weisl, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Rao, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned, subject to the approval of the Court:

1. That the subject merchandise consists of hardboard exported from Sweden as to which the Secretary of the Treasury issued a finding of dumping, published in 89 TD 197, TD 53567, made pursuant to the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C., 160, et seq.).

2. That pursuant to Section 168 of said Antidumping Act, the appraiser reported the purchase price (Sec. 162) and the foreign market value (Sec. 164) as to the merchandise listed on Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof.

*7983. That pursuant to Sections 500 and 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, the appraiser appraised all of the merchandise in the appeals for appraisement enumerated on Schedule A for regular duty purposes.

4. That the plaintiff duly filed appeals for reappraisement as to the values referred to in the above paragraphs Nos. 2 and 3.

5. That at the times relevant herein the purchase price and the foreign market value under the said Antidumping Act are as specified in the aforesaid Schedule A attached hereto.

6. That as to all other items of merchandise not identified on Schedule A, the appraiser’s reports of purchase price and of foreign market value are correct.

7. That the appraiser’s findings of value under the provisions of Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, are correct.

8. That said appeals are submitted for decision upon this stipulation and said Schedule A.

Upon the agreed facts, I find foreign market value, as defined in section 164 of the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C. § 164), for the merchandise described in schedule A, annexed to this decision and made a part hereof, and the purchase price thereof, within section 162 of said act (19 U.S.C. § 162), to be as indicated in said schedule. As to all other items of merchandise not identified in schedule A, I find the foreign market values and purchase prices to be as reported by the appraiser. In all other respects, the values of all merchandise are as returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
#### FAIRVIEW PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NUMBER ONE et al. *v.*CITY OF ANCHORAGE.

No. 223.

Decided October 8, 1962.

*George E. C. Hayes*for appellants.

*Charles S. Rhyne*for appellee.

Per Curiam.

The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed. Treating the papers whereon the appeal was taken as a petition for writ of certiorari, certiorari is denied.

Mr. Justice Goldberg took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
EX-4.7



 Exhibit 4.7 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO TRUST AGREEMENT BETWEEN 
 FIDELITY MANAGEMENT TRUST
COMPANY AND 
 THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION 
 THIS FIRST AMENDMENT, dated as of the seventh day of November, 2006, by and between Fidelity Management Trust Company (the “Trustee”) and The Progressive Corporation (the “Sponsor”),

 WITNESSETH 
 WHEREAS, the Trustee and the Sponsor heretofore entered into a Trust Agreement dated July 1, 2005 with regard to The Progressive Retirement Security Program (the “Plan”), and 

WHEREAS, the Trustee and the Sponsor now desire to amend said Trust Agreement as provided for in Section 13 thereof, 

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, the Trustee and the Sponsor hereby amend the Trust Agreement by 

 

	 	(1)	Restating the last paragraph of Section 5(b), as follows 

 The investment options initially selected by the Named Fiduciary are identified on Schedule “C” attached hereto. Investment options may be added or deleted based on written direction from the
Named Fiduciary and such direction shall include a revised list of the Plan’s investment options which reflects the directed changes. The Trustee shall have the right to withhold consent to any investment options directed by the Named Fiduciary
based on reasonable administrative considerations. The Trustee may require an amendment of this Agreement prior to the addition of certain types of investment options. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Trustee and the Sponsor have caused this First Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized officers effective as of the day and year first above written. 

 

													
	THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION	 		 	FIDELITY MANAGEMENT TRUST COMPANY
							
	By:	 	/s/ Charles E. Jarrett	 	 	 		 	By:	 	/s/	 	November 16, 2006
		 	Its authorized signatory	 	Date	 		 		 	Its authorized signatory	 	Date
#            

# CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

POWERNOTES (R)

With Maturities of 9 months or more from Date of Issue

Registration No.  333-109182

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (3)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO.  508                                                                   Trade Date:  11/15/04

(To Prospectus Supplement dated November 6, 2003 &

  Prospectus dated October 15,2003)                                                              Issue Date:   11/18/04

The Date of this Pricing SupplementNovember 15, 2004

SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION OR REPAYMENT

 CUSIP                                                                                                                                   Date and terms of redemption or

     or       Stated                                                                   Interest                                       repayment (includingany

Common  Interest                      Price to  Discounts &        Payment     Survivors                  applicable regular or special

  Code      Rate (1)   Maturity  Public (2) Commissions       Frequency       Option  Yes/No     record dates)

14911QXD8  4.375%       05/15/13        100%                1.50%                 Monthly                       YES         NO                                                                                                                                                                                                               

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Principal                                                                                 1st Payment             Day         

Amount                  Proceeds                  Dealer                           Date                   Count

$902,000.00            $888,470.00            ABN AMROInc.        12/15/04               30/360    

Original Issue DiscountNote:                                                                          Total Amount of OID:

____  Yes                X   No                                                                                  N/A

The interest rates on the PowerNotes (R) may be changed by Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation from time to time, but any such change will not affect the interest rate on any PowerNotes (R) offered prior to the effective date of the change.  Prior to the date of this Pricing Supplement, $233.819 mm principal amount of the PowerNotes (R) were sold at interest rates then in effect.  Subsequent offerings of PowerNotes (R) will be made under the Prospectus Supplement and Prospectus dated October 15,2003.

Expressed as a percentage of aggregate principal amount.  Actual Price to Public may be less, and will be determined by prevailing market prices at the time of purchase as set forth in the confirmation sheet.
ex10.2

  
 Exhibit 10.2
 

 
 

 December 21, 2012
 

 Erick Richardson, Esq.
 1100 Glendon Avenue
 8th Floor
 Los Angeles, California 90024
 

 Re:  Issuance of Shares for Legal Services
 

 Dear Mr. Richardson:
 

 This letter confirms our plan to issue to you 76,378 shares of our common stock (the “Shares”), to be registered on Form S-8 with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in payment of $33,188.59 (the “Payment Amount”) of legal services previously rendered to Spindle, Inc. through Richardson & Patel LLP.  The services were rendered through November 30, 2012 and were not in connection with any capital raising transaction or with directly or indirectly promoting or maintaining a market for the securities of Spindle, Inc.
 

 Your signature below indicates your acceptance of the Shares in full satisfaction of the Payment Amount.
 

 Regards,
 

 Spindle, Inc.
 

 

 /s/ Bill Clark
 Bill Clark
 President
 

 

 ACKNOWLEDGED AND ACCEPTED:
 

 

 /s/ Erick E. Richardson, Jr.
 Erick E. Richardson, Jr.
From: woodrkd@tds.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:59:50 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. I strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on

Americans especially for drugs and devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion

(such as ella and Plan B). Providing such services for free will create undue financial burden on other

participants in the plan.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Dawn Woody

Knoxville, TN 37922
|   | (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      at the dates and for the periodsindicated. |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                          |   |                                |
|-------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------|
|                          |   |                                |   |
| Date:       May 14, 2009 | By:    | /s/ Toni      M. Perazzo       |   |
|                          |   | Name:      Toni M. Perazzo          |   |
|                          |   | Title:      Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                          |   |                                |   |
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 2, 2018

No. 04-17-00832-CR

Ex Parte Freddy OQUENDO,

Appellant

From the 112th Judicial District Court, Sutton County, Texas

Trial Court No. 1591B

Honorable Pedro Gomez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is GRANTED. The 

appellant’s brief is due on March 1, 2018.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 2nd day of February, 2018.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
From: godonnell35@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:53:57 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Gertrude O'Donnell

Whitehall, PA 18052
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice: 12189]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to an agreement with their foreign owner or custodian for temporary display in the exhibition “Afterlives: Contemporary Art in the Byzantine Crypt” at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 2021.                

Nicole L. Elkon,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2023-20529 Filed 9-21-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
From: JAWS34@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:49:57 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Pat WELSH

Palm Desert, CA 92260
No. 60146.

protest 640426-G (Seattle).

#### B. R. Anderson & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that 20 percent of the merchandise consists of rags used chiefly for papermaking, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained with respect to said 20 percent of the merchandise.
The “Green”

Energy Efficient

REFRIGERANT

FLAMMABLE LIQUID AND GAS UNDER PRESSURE. CAN FORM EXPLOSIVE MIXTURES WITH AIR. MAY CAUSE FROSTBITE.Keep away from heat, flames, and sparks. Store and use with adequate ventilation. Cylinder temperature should not exceed 125 F (52 C). Do not get liquid in eyes, on skin or clothing. Close valve after each use and when empty. Use in accordance with the Material Safety Data Sheet.IF INHALED, remove to fresh air. If not breathing, give artificial respiration. If breathing is difficult, give oxygen. Call a physician.DO NOT REMOVE THIS LABEL.

CHEMICAL NAME Propane n-Butane 1Isobutane Ethane 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE: LIQUEFIED GAS, NHCR 188C should be charged liquid phase. For liquid withdrawal, turn cylinder upside down. The refrigerant should not be mixed with oxygen or air above atmospheric pressure for leak testing or any other purpose. Connect charging hose to valve outlet. Do not connect to the high pressure side of any system.DANGER:FIRST AID:

sobu a e 

Ethane 

SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS FOR HANCYLINDERS: Protect cylinders adamage. Store in cool, dry, welaway from sources of heat, ignitsunlight. Do not allow area whestored to exceed 51 C (125 F). Uor trap in the discharge line to prbackflow. Cylinders should be stbe firmly secured to prevent falliknocked over. Cylinders can be sopen, but in such cases should bagainst extremes of weather and dampness of the ground to prevetamper with pressure relief deviccylinders. PATENT PENDING

R

HCR 188C

The Climate Friendly Energy Saving 

The Climate Friendly Refrigerant

R 441A

CONFORMS TO UL STD 218
#### Elvira Nado et al., Respondents, v State of New York, Appellant.

(Claim No. 76137.)

[631 NYS2d 444]

—In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant State *398of New York appeals from an interlocutory judgment of the Court of Claims (Corbett, J.), dated May 27, 1994, which, after a nonjury trial on the issue of liability, found it 50% at fault and the claimant 50% at fault in the happening of the accident.

Ordered that the interlocutory judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The trial court’s conclusion that Elvira Nado’s fall was caused by her stepping into a hole in the curb, rather than by stepping off the curb, as the State suggests, was not against the weight of the evidence. Although Mrs. Nado admitted that she did not see the hole when she fell, she did testify that she knew she had stepped into a hole because she could feel it with her foot. Accordingly, where, as here, the trial court’s determination is not against the weight of the evidence or contrary to law, this Court will not disturb that determination on appeal *(see, Taran v State of New York,*186 AD2d 794, 795; *Vizzari v State of New York,*184 AD2d 564; *Schock v State of New York,*168 AD2d 491).

The trial court properly found that the State was responsible for maintaining the section of the curb where Mrs. Nado fell. Both "curb” and "sidewalk” are defined by the Vehicle and Traffic Law *(see,*Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 111, 144). In *Skelly v Village of Port Chester*(6 AD2d 717), this Court observed that the curb was not an entity unto itself but was either part of the highway or street, or part of the sidewalk, but in that case, it was not necessary to resolve the issue. Here, the claimants offered expert testimony by a structural engineer that the functional purposes of a curb, including drainage of the roadway and demarcation of the roadway edge, were such that a curb is an element of the roadway. Both of the State’s witnesses agreed that the curb served such purposes, but nonetheless suggested that the court adopt a more practical view recognizing that a curb, or at least its horizontal surface, was part of the sidewalk. Notably, however, the State’s expert witness and Resident Engineer for Western Orange County conceded that where a curb existed without a sidewalk, the State was responsible for its maintenance.

Contrary to the State’s contentions, the statutes do not reveal that the Legislature intended maintenance of curbs to be the responsibility of the entity charged with maintaining the sidewalk. Indeed, as the court reasoned, this argument is undermined by the existence of an exception imposing the duty of curb maintenance on local government entities under certain circumstances, which have not been shown to be ap*399plicable here *(see,*Highway Law § 12 [5]). Miller, J. P., Altman, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.