alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(R.D. 11426)

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

(Decided December 18, 1967)

*Sharp, Solter & 'Hutchison*for the plaintiff.

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

Nao, 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 *807of 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.

3. 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 dutv 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 time 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.
From: JM2WALL@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:40:23 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,

Jack & Marie Wallace

Anaheim, CA 92807
From: harris255gop@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:41:59 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,

Erich Wolz

Houston, TX 77035
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FILED AS PART OF THE
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH REPORT
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,598
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   60,724
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,424
<INVENTORY>                                     38,265
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               109,648
<PP&E>                                          16,580
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,421
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 227,997
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           40,469
<BONDS>                                        159,465
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            93
<OTHER-SE>                                      24,368
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   227,997
<SALES>                                         76,514
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                99,785
<CGS>                                           42,384
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   57,915
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   441
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,745
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (990)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (990)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (990)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.11)



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                              
<ARTICLE>                                          5
<CIK>                                              0001037189
<NAME>                        SMITH BARNEY WESTPORT FUTURES FUND L.P.
                                                    
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                       MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                                    112,246,989
<SECURITIES>                                                4,297,646
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 410,048
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                          116,954,683
<PP&E>                                                              0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                            116,954,683
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       2,143,952
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                                114,810,731
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                              116,954,683
<SALES>                                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           (4,503,189)
<CGS>                                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            1,233,580
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            (5,736,769)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                               (5,736,769)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  (50.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       0
        

</TABLE>
|   |  (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 results of operations of the Company. |

|  Date:  February 21, 2012 |  /s/ Kent M. Adams                               |
|------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                                     |  Kent M. Adams                                   |
|                                     |  President, Director and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                     |                                                  |
|                                     |                                                  |
|                                     |                                                  |
|  Date:  February 21, 2012 |  /s/ James A. Duensing                      |
|                                     |  James A. Duensing                               |
|                                     |  Executive Vice President and Chief Financial    |
|                                     |  Officer                                         |
From: shchosen@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:27:41 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,

Shirley Hobbs

Eastland, TX 76448
No. 80, Misc.

#### Wakin *v.*Keenan, Workhouse Superintendent.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Certiorari denied.
**EXHIBIT 31.2**
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, J. Burke Asher, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of RemingtonOil and Gas Corporation;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under whichsuch statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cashflows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:
          (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared;
          (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as ofthe end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and
          (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):
          (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting whichare reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and
          (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: April 27, 2004      /s/        J. Burke Asher  J. Burke Asher *Vice President/Finance*
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                        Washington, D.C. 20549


                               FORM 8-K
                            CURRENT REPORT


                  Pursuant to Section 13 of 15(d) of
                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): July 30, 1999

                  CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP
          (Exact name of Registrant as specified in charter)

                               Delaware
                     (State or other jurisdiction
                           of incorporation)

0-13295                                                 37-1105865
(Commission File Number)                    (IRS Employer I.D. No.)

3322 WEST END AVE.                                 37203-0983
(Address of principal executive offices)           (Zip Code)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (615)386-5800

<PAGE>
Item 5. Other Events
Further study of the registrant's operations in Europe indicated that
the expected efficiencies and cost-savings arising from a centralized
'bank and branch' structure across Western Europe would not be
realized. Therefore, on July 30th, 1999, one of the registrant's wholly
owned subsidiaries in Ireland, Caterpillar International Bank plc,
surrendered its banking license to the Central Bank of Ireland and
changed its name to Caterpillar Financial Services (Ireland) plc. The
registrant's Euro Commercial Paper and Euro Certificate of Deposit
program, as well as the back-up revolving credit facility, will be
amended to remove the bank as a participant."

<PAGE>
                              SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf
by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.


                         CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

                             By: /s/EDWARD J.SCOTT
                                   Edward J. Scott, Treasurer

DATE: July 30, 1999
Case No. 12,895a.

#### SINCLAIR v. McELMURRY.

[Hempst. 28.] 1

Superior Court, Territory of Arkansas.

April, 1825.

Appeal — Notice—Default.

Where an appeal is not taken on the day of trial, the opposite party is entitled to notice thereof, before a default can be taken against him.

Error to the Pulaski circuit court.

Before JOHNSON, SCOTT, and TRIM-BLE, JJ.

OPINION OF

THE COURT.

[Abraham] Sinclair, the plaintiff in error, sued out a warrant from a justice of the peace against McElmurry, the defendant in error, on an account amounting to twenty-eight dollars, and judgment was rendered by the justice in favor of Sinclair for that amount. Nine days after the rendition of the judgment, David McElmurry appealed to the circuit court, and it does not appear that notice of the appeal was ever served on Sinclair. At the succeeding term of the circuit court, Sinclair was called, and not appearing, judgment of non-suit was entered against him, and to reverse which he prosecutes this writ of error.

We have no doubt that the court erred in entering judgment against Sinclair. The appeal was taken by McElmurry after the day of trial, and in such cases the law required that the appealing party should notify the opposite party of the appeal at least ten days before the next court authorized to try *195the same. Geyer, Dig. 391. Here, notice of the appeal was not given to Sinclair, and without it he was not bound to appear. A judgment for a default can never be entered against a person who is not in default, and how could Sinclair be so considered until he was regularly and legally notified of the pendency of the appeal in the appellate court. As no notice was given, McElmurry, and not Sinclair, was in default. We are clearly of opinion that the judgment of the circuit court is erroneous, and must be reversed. Reversed.
Motion Granted; Order filed February 15, 2018 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-17-00520-CV

____________

FORT BEND COUNTY, Appellant

V.

MELISSA ANN NORSWORTHY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 268th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 14-DCV-213052B

ORDER

On July 3, 2017, appellant filed a notice of appeal from an order signed April 

21, 2017, and the appeal was assigned to this court under our appellate number 14-

17-00520-CV. On July 28, 2017, appellant filed a second notice of appeal from the 

same order, which was assigned to this court under our appellate number 14-17-

00633-CV. On December 12, 2017, appellant filed a motion to consolidate the 

related appeals. The motion is granted in part and we issue the following order:
We order all records and documents filed in cause number 14-17-00633-CV 

transferred and filed into cause number 14-17-00520-CV. We order the record and 

brief filed in our appellate case number 14-17-00633-CV transferred to appellant 

cause number 14-17-00520-CV. Appellate cause number 14-17-00633-CV will be 

dismissed and this case will proceed under the existing filing deadlines in cause 

number 14-17-00520-CV styled Fort Bend County v. Melissa Ann Norsworthy.

PER CURIAM