alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 10814)

#### Geo. S. Bush *&*Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 5378.

(Decided August 31, 1964)

*Eugene R. Piohrell*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the Plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, defendant, subject to the approval of the Court:

> *3981. The merchandise marked “A” and initialed YWJ by Examiner V. W. Johnson on the invoices herein consists of Ascorbic Acid, exported from Denmark to the United States, during the period from 1/1/61 to 12/31/61.

> 2. Ascorbic Acid is on the final list promulgated by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, published as T.D. 54521, in the Federal Register, issue of January 20,1958.

> 3. That at the time of exportation of such merchandise, its export value within the meaning of Section 402a (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, was less than its foreign value within the meaning of Section 402a (c) of that Act.

> 4. That foreign value as defined in section 402a (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, is the proper basis of determining the value for appraisement of this merchandise, and that such value is:

> Period Value Rate exchange Basis

> 9/1/61 to 12/31/61 39. DK per kilo 96% official FV

> 4% import

> rights

> 5. The appeal for reappraisement, as enumerated on Schedule 1 annexed hereto, may be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402a (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved and that such value for the period below indicated was as follows:

> Period Value Rate exchange

> 9/1/61 to 12/31/61 39. DK per kilo 96% official

> 4% import

> rights

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Case 2:06-cr-00157-MJP Document 4 Filed 09/17/08 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cr-00157-MJP Document 4 Filed 09/17/08 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cr-00157-MJP Document 4 Filed 09/17/08 Page 3 of 3
From: lkslks62@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:39:30 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,

Lisa Snyder

Elizabethville, PA 17023
No. 67572.

#### Charles Garcia & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 284926-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fishing lines the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 60183, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the First Division,

April 24, 1963

No. 67618.

#### Williams, Clarke Co. and Felix Glatz Import Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/12825, etc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *Falcon Sales Company*and *J. J. Murphy & Co.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 129, C.D. 2292), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 1195** 

JOHN ROBERT DEMOS, JR. ,
P laintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

DANIEL PAYSEUR; WACHOVIA BANK & TRUST COMPANY; FIRST CHARTER BANK; BANK OF AMERICA , Defenda nts

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Louise W. Flanagan , Chief District Judge. ( 5 : 1 0

- cv
- 00 011

- FL )

Submitted : April 27, 2010 Decided: May 1 9 , 2010

Before MOTZ, KING , and SHEDD , Cir cuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

John Robert Demos, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
John Robert Demos, Jr., appeals the district court ’s order dismissing this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g)
(2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible
error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis
and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the district

court. Demos v. Payseur , No. 5:10

- cv
- 00011

- FL (E.D.N.C. Jan.
19, 2010) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT
32 (i)





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTIONS 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTS OF 2002





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 AmeriResource Technologies, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 (the "Report"), as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, on the date hereof (the
“Report), the undersigned, Delmar Janovec, Chief Executive Officer and the
person performing functions similar to that of a Principal Financial Officer of
the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant
to 18 U.S.C., Section 1350, 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 results of operations of the Company.





Date:
      May 20, 2008/S/ Delmar
      JanovecDelmar
      JanovecChief
      Executive Officer andPrincipal
      Financial Officer
MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Posting EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0187 to Regulations.gov for Public Access 

FROM: Dan Kenny 

Branch Chief 

Signature: 

THRU: Susan Lewis 

Registration Division US EP A/OSCPP/OPP 

~- _;)~ 3/3J)2P!f:' 

car fiu7f11 1lew15 

3/ ?JI /~ 

This memorandum authorizes the posting of EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0187 to 

Regulations.gov for public access. 

Monsanto Company has submitted an application to amend their M1691 Dicamba 

Herbicide for use on dicamba tolerant cotton and soybeans. This is an issue of high public 

interest and concern so the Agency feels it is important to get feedback from stakeholders 

before a final decision is reached. 

This document will be open for public comment from 03/31/2016 to 04/30/2016. 

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0187, by one 

of the following methods: 

• Electronically: www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments. 

• Mail: Dicamba: New Use on Herbicide-Tolerant Cotton and Soybeans 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode 28221 T, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

code 28221 T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460. 

Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 

operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 

boxed information. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider 

to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied 

by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the 

full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and 

general guidance on making effective comments, please visit: 

http://www.epa.gov I dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lewis, Registration Division, 

US EPA/OSCPP/OPP 7505P, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, 

NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (703) 305-7090 email address: 

RDFRnotices@epa.gov
<PAGE>   1
     EXHIBIT 11.1

                       GLOBAL VILLAGE COMMUNICATION, INC.
                   COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE
                      (in thousands, except per share data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          Three Months Ended December 31,    Nine Months Ended December 31,
                                               1996             1995             1996             1995
                                             --------         --------         --------         --------
<S>                                          <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>     
Net income (loss)
    from continuing operations               $(30,946)        $  3,522         $(35,925)        $  8,749
                                             --------         --------         --------         --------

Discontinued operations
    Loss from discontinued operations        $     --         $ (1,272)        $ (1,822)        $ (2,592)


    Loss on disposal of discontinued
       operations                            $ (9,800)              --         $ (7,667)              --

                                             --------         --------         --------         --------
    Net income (loss)                        $(40,746)        $  2,250         $(45,414)        $  6,157
                                             ========         ========         ========         ========

Weighted average shares
    outstanding during the period              16,725           16,630           16,771           16,422
Common stock equivalents                           --            1,440               --            1,622
                                             --------         --------         --------         --------
                                               16,725           18,070           16,771           18,044
                                             ========         ========         ========         ========

    Net income (loss) per share
       from continuing operations            $  (1.85)        $   0.19         $  (2.14)        $   0.48
    Net loss per share
       from discontinued operations          $  (0.59)        $  (0.07)        $  (0.57)        $  (0.14)

                                             --------         --------         --------         --------
    Net income (loss) per share              $  (2.44)        $   0.12         $  (2.71)        $   0.34
                                             ========         ========         ========         ========
</TABLE>


     (1) Fully diluted earnings per share have not been presented because the
     differences from primary are not significant.




                                       23
No. 59817.

#### C. M. Gourdon, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 134574-K, etc. (New York).

*393Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of woven silk fabrics, bleached, valued at more than $5.50 per pound, the same in all material respects as those the subject of *United States*v. *C. M. Gourdon, Inc.*(43 C. C. P. A. 4, C. A. D. 601), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 32


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                           PURSUANT TO
                     18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Scott Emerson Lybbert, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Quarterly Report of TGFIN Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter
ended September 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of TGFIN Holdings, Inc.


                           By:  /s/ Scott Emerson Lybbert
                           Name: Scott Emerson Lybbert
                           Title: Chief Executive Officer





I, Scott Emerson Lybbert, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Quarterly Report of TGFIN Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter
ended September 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
in such Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of TGFIN Holdings, Inc.


                           By: /s/ Scott Emerson Lybbert
                           Name: Scott Emerson Lybbert
                           Title: Chief Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Franklin Zurita, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 972]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (DeLury, J.), rendered March 21, 1994, convicting him of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
— ~^t a ^ RECE8VEB ilk 

### La fV (W^ Q£ Criminal fty^lSO^OFCRBfi^/ujS ^ -AU8-22-2M5- %s! ^soste, Cta
v . 

### ^^aieOl_T^as_ AUG 2? 2015- Abel Acosta, Cierk ri^ELLftQT'S \&A\\vc>^ ^pR P\S(lJ-e^o(VX^y VNgVi£u) 

### Tp'rW>e> V\ptQfl^(ts^JtxM^s &$ "W-CoLt^A-04- dfeifa'orvA hfrftgols ; 

### JX^idlW^JkUAaJ^H^^ ~*VW C^ucV beW-> ts. fcimired ^v^TvcJr (Wet Uawber^>ijdu\.

> 1 .'•'.' 'IJL 

### Aad a. *10,000£;n&. , ... 

### fVppe\W3r is> pro^geDin^ j>rosg 1aHire abor>g. oa^sc ie^aSj ; : : ; : m. ; 

### Ta Support o-f V&jL tf)o\\Or> • ftpp&lWV ujfto vs praceeibifiCi Prose, ;^> oAo^Qe£> &&Ges>s \o^y„ u^iH vVxu>Ubraca'' oniu 10 koars 

### ^efu>ee,Vl. r\^ \W.V must M ncw*A~uXiW' q^ oC Witaocur^a/iVs 'lAciu/^rva cwia c**^ Uu> Icr/tEeD fl.p/jt &-\Wfr disposal, n^p^iWV ^O^L 

### WUUp-^> TRAP V?>(WM^ rcaaiftgs, Upoo'&Um &-^g\c4ton Fc

-——— : ; ——~-~——r— ~y —^y. -_ _^^£l^J3QQg^y-Jjc^^ -*?Agp VjOl^-^C

1 \ (
_ _ _ _ i '' -2-
March 28, 1957

No. 60592.

Suit 4904.

#### United States *v.*Prime Fur Corp.

C. D. 1802. (Appeal dismissed February 8, 1957.)
---

|Coded Tables | 
|------------ | 



|These data are released whenever there are code changes.                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Complete file (2 MB PDF)Cover page and table of contents (500 KB PDF)
Summary tables (205 KB PDF)
Flows tables (550 KB PDF)
Level tables (525 KB PDF)
Balance sheet tables (70 KB PDF)
Supplementary tables (130 KB PDF)
Integrated macroeconomic accounts table (290 KB PDF)

|These files are available in Acrobat (PDF 3) format only.Obtaining the free Acrobat Reader from the Adobe Web Site
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Release dates | 
Announcements | 
Coded tables | Historical data | About| Technical Q&AsCurrent release | 
Screen reader |  
PDF (2.4 MB) | 
Data Download Program (DDP)  | Preliminary Z.1 Code Updates

Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: March 12, 2015
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Chief Judge Fitzpatrick, Senior Judges Coleman and Annunziata 

DEBORAH JEAN HOLT 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* 

v. Record No. 1022-05-1 PER CURIAM 

 NOVEMBER 1, 2005 

GREENBRIER REALTY COMPANY, INC. AND 

 THE UNINSURED EMPLOYER’S FUND 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Robert G. Byrum; Shames & Byrum, P.C., on brief), for appellant. 

 No brief for appellee Greenbrier Realty Company, Inc. 

 (Paul R. Schmidt; Huff, Poole & Mahoney, P.C., on brief), for 

appellee The Uninsured Employer’s Fund. 

 Deborah Jean Holt (claimant) appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation 

Commission finding that (1) her claim for knee and peroneal nerve injuries was time-barred by 

the statute of limitations contained in Code § 65.2-601; (2) she failed to present a current opinion 

of disability resulting from her compensable 1999 injuries; (3) she failed to prove that her 

ongoing right ankle problem and exacerbation of her Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD) was 

causally related to her compensable 1999 injuries; (4) she failed to prove she was totally disabled 

as a result of her compensable 1999 injuries; and (5) her right ankle injury and exacerbation of 

her RSD had currently improved to their pre-injury status.1

 We have reviewed the record and the 

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication. 

1

 Claimant also argues that the commission erred in not considering “various independent 

medical examinations and videotapes from the three (3) treating physicians.” Initially, we note 

that in her two-sentence argument with respect to this question presented, claimant failed to 

identify the treating physicians by name, and the pages she referenced in the record as the place 

where she preserved this question for appellate review do not relate to the question. “We will 
 - 2 - 

commission’s opinion and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See Holt v. Greenbrier Realty Company, 

Inc., VWC File No. 196-62-14 (April 8, 2005). We dispense with oral argument and summarily 

affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

Affirmed.

 

not search the record for errors in order to interpret appellant’s contention and correct 

deficiencies in a brief.” Buchanan v. Buchanan, 14 Va. App. 53, 56, 415 S.E.2d 237, 239 

(1992). Secondly, the commission ruled that claimant “did not argue against exclusion of the 

videotaped depositions,” and therefore, she “waived and abandoned” that assignment of error. 

Accordingly, this question is not properly before us and we will not consider it on appeal. See

Rule 5A:18.
From: KrisR_3108@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:32:14 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,

Kristina Robarge

Peoria, AZ 85381
No. 58302.

protests 223608-K and 224277-K (New York).

#### Aero Sea Shipping Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

From an examination of the papers in these cases, the court was unable to find anything to overcome the presumption of correctness of the collector’s classification. The protests were therefore overruled.