alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 58716.

protest 183328-K (Los Angeles).

#### Frederick F. Straus and Perryman, Mojonier Company *v.*United States,

Johnson, Judge:

The merchandise involved herein, consists of pieces of decorated chinaware, classified by the collector as tableware, not plates, and assessed with duty at 70 per centum ad valorem and 10 cents per dozen pieces under paragraph 212 of the Tariff Act of 1930, or at 45 per centum ad valorem and 10 cents per dozen pieces under said paragraph, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 51802, and the President’s proclamation of April 22, 1948, T. D. 51898.

It is claimed in the protest that the 11-inch plates and the 7^-inch plates, and all goods of the same general kind or character as the goods specified, are properly dutiable at 35 per centum ad valorem and 10 cents per dozen pieces under said paragraph 212, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 51802.

At the trial, Frederick F. Straus, the importer herein, testified that this merchandise was similar to that involved in a previous case *(Frederick F. Straus*v. *United States,*30 Oust. Ct. 370, Abstract 57125), except as to size and decoration. He explained that the items in the earlier case were 7^-inch and 11-inch plates, having a fruit decoration, while those in the present case were 7J4-inch, 5%-inch, and *9}i-mch*plates, having a flower decoration. The record in the previous case was then incorporated herein.

In that case, it appeared that the collector had assessed duty on the merchandise as dishes rather than as plates, but, after investigation, the Bureau of Customs changed its ruling and stated that the articles should have been classified as plates. Therefore, the protest was sustained and the merchandise held dutiable at 35 per centum ad valorem and 10 cents per dozen pieces under paragraph 212, as modified.

On the authority of that decision and the record presented herein, we hold that the instant merchandise is dutiable as plates under paragraph 212 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 51802, at the appropriate rates provided therein. The protest is sustained and judgment will be rendered for the plaintiffs, directing the collector to reliquidate the entry and make refund accordingly.
```

[111th Congress Public Law 30]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[[Page 123 STAT. 1775]]

Public Law 111-30
111th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To amend title II of the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and 
 Reform Act of 2004 to extend the operation of such title for a 1-year 
  period ending June 22, 2010. <<NOTE: June 19, 2009 -  [H.R. 2675]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Antitrust 
Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004 Extension Act. 15 
USC 1 note.>> 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Antitrust Criminal Penalty 
Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004 Extension Act''.
SEC. 2. DELAY OF SUNSET.

    Section 211(a) of the Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and 
Reform Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 1 note) is amended by striking ``5 years'' 
and inserting ``6 years''.
SEC. 3. <<NOTE: 15 USC 1 note.>>  EFFECTIVE DATE OF AMENDMENT.

    The amendment made by section 2 shall take effect immediately before 
June 22, 2009.

    Approved June 19, 2009.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 2675:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
            June 9, considered and passed House.
            June 17, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 239

To authorize testimony and document production and representation of Senate

employees in Pointe Properties, Inc., et al. v. Michael J. Bevenour, et al.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 1, 1998

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To authorize testimony and document production and representation of Senate employees in Pointe Properties,

Inc., et al. v. Michael J. Bevenour, et al.

Whereas, in the case of Pointe Properties, Inc., et al. v. Michael J. Bevenour, et al., No. 96–CA–009720, pending in

the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, testimony has been requested from Mike Morrill, an employee

on the staff of Senator Barbara A. Mikulski;

Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the

Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. §§ 288b(a)

and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may direct its counsel to represent employees of the Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request for testimony or the production

of documents relating to their official responsibilities;
2

SRES 239 ATS

Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States

and Rule XI of the Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the possession of the Senate may, by the judicial process, be taken from such control or possession but by permission of the Senate; and

Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or

in the possession of the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will take such action as will

promote the ends of justice consistently with the privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That Mike Morrill, and any other employee

2 from whom testimony or document production may be re3 quired, are authorized to testify and produce documents

4 in the case of Pointe Properties, Inc., et al. v. Michael

5 J. Bevenour, et al., except concerning matters for which

6 a privilege should be asserted.

7 SEC. 2. The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to

8 represent Mike Morrill, and any other employee from

9 whom testimony or document production may be required,

10 in connection with Pointe Properties, Inc., et al. v. Michael

11 J. Bevenour, et al.

Æ
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

Officer’s Certification

 

I, Dean R. Anderson, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K,and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing reportsfiled in respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual report,of Wells Fargo Financial Auto Owner Trust 2005-A;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, the information inthese reports, taken as a whole, does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.     Based on my knowledge, the servicinginformation required to be provided to the Indenture Trustee by the Master Servicerunder the Sale and Servicing Agreement for inclusion in these reports isincluded in these reports;

 

4.     I am responsible for reviewing theactivities performed by the Master Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreementand based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required under theSale and Servicing Agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the MasterServicer has fulfilled its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement;and

 

5.     The reports disclose all significantdeficiencies relating to the Master Servicer’s compliance with the minimumservicing standards based upon the report provided by an independent registeredpublic accounting firm, after conducting a review in compliance with theUniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure,as set forth in the Sale and Servicing Agreement, that is included in thesereports.

 
| Date:      March 20, 2006 | /s/ Dean R. Anderson                               |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                               | Dean R. Anderson                                   |
|                                               | Vice President                                     |
|                                               | Wells Fargo Financial, Inc., Master  Servicer |

 

----
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 1 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 2 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 3 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 4 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 5 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 6 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 7 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 8 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 9 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 10 of 11
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-3 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 11 of 11
<PAGE>
 
EXHIBIT 10

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       TO
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                          UC TELEVISION NETWORK CORP.

  UC Television Network Corp., a corporation organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Delaware (the "Corporation"), pursuant to the provisions of
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, does hereby certify as
follows:

                                       1.
  The Certification of Incorporation is hereby amended by deleting in its
entirety the first paragraph of Article Four of the Certificate of Incorporation
in its present from and substituting in lieu thereof a new first paragraph of
Article Four in the following form:

       "FOURTH:  The total number of shares of capital stock which the
       Corporation shall have authority to issues is One Hundred Two Million
       (102,000,000) shares, of which, One Hundred Million (100,000,000) shares
       shall be Common Stock, par value $0.001, and Two Million (2,000,000)
       shares will be Preferred Stock, par value $0.001 per share."

  The amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation set forth in this
Certificate of Amendment has been duty adopted in accordance with the applicable
provisions of Section 242 of the General; Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware, (a) in lieu of a meeting and vote of directors, all of the directors
having duly consented in writing to the adoption of such amendment, and (b) in
lieu of a meeting and vote of the shareholders, the holders of a majority of the
common stock of the Corporation who would have been entitled to vote upon such
amendment if a meeting of shareholders were called and held having duty
consented in writing to the adoption of such amendment.

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, fully authorized officer of the
Corporation, has executed this Certificate of Amendment and does hereby declare
and certify, under the penalties of perjury, that this is his act and deed and
the facts herein are true, as of this 15th day of May, 1997.

                                       UC TELEVISION NETWORK CORP.
                                        
                                       By:
                                           ------------------------------------

                                            Name:
                                                  -----------------------------
                                            Title:
                                                  -----------------------------
Case No. 9,580a.

#### MILLER v. LONG ISLAND R. CO.

[10 Reporter, 197; 15 Cin. Law Bul. 634.]

Circuit Court, E. D. New York.

July 13, 1880.

Railroad — Use of Steam — Nuisance — Injunction — Abuse of Franchise — Parties to Injunction — Fencings with Crossings in Town —Private Inconvenience.

1. Where a railroad is a lawful structure, and the use of steam is permitted by law. the use of the road and the use of the steam on it, independently of any abuse, is not a public nuisance to be enjoined. Where the abuse, if any, is general and common to all owners of adjacent property, the defendants can be called to account only by the sovereign authority.

2. The fencing of a railroad in a city 'with gates at the street crossings is a regulation for public safety, and any incidental inconvenience is merged in the superior interest of the public.

Bill in equity. The action was brought to restrain defendant from building a railroad, and fencing the same, on Atlantic avenue, in Brooklyn.

S. Hand, S. Sterne, and G. Thompson, for plaintiff.

B. F. Tracy and E. B. Hinsdale, for defendant

1

 [Reprinted from 10 Reporter, 197, by permission.]

BLATCHFORD, Circuit Judge.

The railroad in question being a lawful structure, and the use of steam power on it being lawful, the use of the road, and the use of the steam power on it by the defendants, is not and cannot be of itself, independently of any abuse in the manner of use, a public nuisance to be enjoined. If there be any abuse in the use of the road, or of steam power on it, such abuse is, on the evidence, one which affects the plaintiff and his property no differently from the manner in which it affects all owners of property along the avenue. The abuse, if any, is one for which the defendants must and can be called to account, not by the plaintiff, but by the sovereign authority of the state or of the city. Osborn v. Brooklyn *333City R. Co. [Case No. 10,597]; Currier v. West Side Elevated R. Co. [Id. 3,493].

The foregoing observations apply equally to the fencing. The use of the road and of steam power on it being lawful, it seems to be proper and necessary that the road should be fenced in with gates at the street crossings. This is a regulation for public safety properly made by the common council under the act of 1S76. Any incidental inconvenience from the fencing is merged in the superior interest of the public. Kellinger v. Forty-Second St. R. Co., 50 N. Y. 206.

Bill dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

(SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

Pursuant to, and solely for purposes of, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), each of the undersigned hereby certifies in the capacity and on the date indicated
below that:

1. The Quarterly Report of Monro Muffler Brake, Inc. (Monro) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
December 25, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (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 Monro.



|                                                  |  |  |  |                        
|------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|/s/ Robert G. Gross                               |  |  |  | Dated: February 3, 2011
|Robert G. Gross                                   |  |  |  |                        
|Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board |  |  |  |                        
|                                                  |  | 
|/s/ Catherine DAmico                             |  |  |  | Dated: February 3, 2011
|Catherine DAmico                                 |  |  |  |                        
|Executive Vice President  Finance and            |  |  |  |                        
|Chief Financial Officer                           |  |  |  |                        



27
S e e A n d e rs v . C a lifo rn ia , 3 8 6 U .S . 7 3 8 , 8 7 S .C t. 1 3 9 6 , 1 8 L .E d .2 d 4 9 3 (1 9 6 7 ). 1 NO. 07-08 -047 1-CR

IN THE CO UR T OF APPEA LS FO R THE S EVEN TH D ISTRI CT O F TEXAS

AT AM AR ILLO PAN EL B MA Y14, 2009

_________

_________

_________

___ THELM A LEE W ILEY , Appel lan t

v. THE S TATE OF TEXAS, Appel lee

_________

_________

_________

______ FRO M T HE 11 0 DIS T RI CT COU RT OF DI CK EN S CO UNT Y; TH NO. 235 0; HON. W ILL IAM P. SMIT H, PRESIDING

_________

_________

_________

____ Anders Opinion

_________

_________

_________

____ Before QUINN, C.J. and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. After a jur

y tri al, T hel ma Lee W il ey w as found g uil ty

of the off ense of mansl aug hter
w it h a d eadl y

w eapon. Her

puni shmentw as ass ess ed attw enty y ears c onfinement and a fine of $10,000. Appel lan t’ s a ppoi nted couns el has filed a mot io n to w it hdraw , t og ether w it h an And ers brief . In t hatb rief , he certif ies tha t he diligently search ed th e record for arguable

1Appel l ant al so ha s a r i ght t o f i l e a pr o s e p e ti ti o n fo r d i s c re ti o n a ry re v i e w fr o m th e o p in io n o f th is 2 c o u rt. 2 er ro r and found non e. Al ong w it h h is b rie f, he fil ed a copy of a l etter

se nt t o appel lan t infor ming her of

his conc lus ion and of her ri g ht t o fil e a b ri ef or re spons e pr o s e. By

l etter 2 d a t e d F e b ru a ry 26 , 2 0 0 9 , t h is Co u rt a ls o n o t if ie d a p p e ll a n t o f h e r ri gh t t o f il e h e r o wn re spons e by

M ar ch 30, 2 009, if sh e s o w is h e d

. T h e reafter, appel lan t req uest ed an
extens ion of the d eadl ine , w hic h ex tens ion the Cou rtgranted to Apri l 29, 2 009. To date , w e hav e recei v ed nei ther a respon se nor

anot her req uestfor a n exte n sio n o f t ime from appel lan t. I n c o mp l i ance w it h the pr inc ipl es enunc iat ed i n And ers , app ell ate c ounse l dis cus sed
v ar iou s p hases of the t ria l inc lud ing 1) v oir di re , 2) the ev ide nce off er ed atthe guilt/innoce nce p hase of tri al, an d 3) the evidence of fered at the pun ishm ent pha se of trial. Coun sel also discusse d the procee dings and a n a lyzed th e evidence of fered before conclu ding thatno reversible error existed. Th erea f ter, w e revi ewed the reco rd to asse ss the a cc u ra cy of appel lat e c ounse l’ s c oncl usi ons and t o unc ov er any arg uabl e er ro r pursuantto Staf

for d v . St ate, 8 1 3 S

. W

. 2 d 5 0 3 (T e x. Cr im

. A p p . 1 9 9 1 ). Up o n d o in g s o , we too d eci de th at t here ex is ts no arg uabl e er ro r w ar ra nti ng appel lat e rev iew

. Acc ordin g ly , t he moti on to w it hdraw i s g ra nted and t he j udg ment i s a ff ir med.

Br ian Qui nn Chief Justice

Do not p ubl is h.
No. P67/218.

#### Starlight Trading, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 65/7949, etc. (New York).

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of rayon labels similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Bruce Duncan*Co., *Inc., a/c Standard Commodities Import & Export Corp.*v. *United States*(51 Cust. Ct. 27, C.D. 2409), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
# Official Journal C 313/2011

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2011.313.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 313 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5426 October 2011 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2011.313.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 313

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5426 October 2011

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2011/C 313/01 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 1 |
| 2011/C 313/02 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (2) | 3 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2011/C 313/01

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

1

2011/C 313/02

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (2)

3

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2011/C 313/03 | Euro exchange rates | 6 |
| 2011/C 313/04 | Communication from the Commission on the quantity of certain products in the milk and milk products sector available for the first half of 2012 under certain quotas opened by the Union | 7 |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2011/C 313/05 | Special Report No 10/2011 ‘Are the School Milk and School Fruit Schemes effective?’ | 9 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2011/C 313/03

Euro exchange rates

6

2011/C 313/04

Communication from the Commission on the quantity of certain products in the milk and milk products sector available for the first half of 2012 under certain quotas opened by the Union

7

Court of Auditors

2011/C 313/05

Special Report No 10/2011 ‘Are the School Milk and School Fruit Schemes effective?’

9

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Commission |
| 2011/C 313/06 | Call for proposals — EACEA/36/11 — MEDIA 2007 — Promotion/Access to markets | 10 |

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Commission

2011/C 313/06

Call for proposals — EACEA/36/11 — MEDIA 2007 — Promotion/Access to markets

10

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty |
| | (2)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty

1

(2)   Text with EEA relevance

2

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

EN
# C_2016203EN.01003901.xml

| 7.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/39

---

Article 106

Member States which, before 1 January 1958 or, for acceding States, before the date of their accession, have concluded agreements with third States providing for cooperation in the field of nuclear energy shall be required to undertake jointly with the Commission the necessary negotiations with these third States in order to ensure that the rights and obligations arising out of such agreements shall as far as possible be assumed by the Community.

Any new agreement ensuing from such negotiations shall require the consent of the Member State or States signatory to the agreements referred to above and the approval of the Council, which shall act by a qualified majority.

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 April 28, 2014

p0421

Order 

Clerk

April 28, 2014

148723

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 148723

COA: 312421

Saginaw CC: 11-036004-FH

MUKHTIAR SINGH,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 21, 2013 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
No. 66130.

#### L. Batlin & Son, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/14534, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of wall plaques similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Ross Products, Inc.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 74, C.D. 2106), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.