alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Before the Third Division,

December 28, 1949

No. 53858.

#### J. A. Dougherty’s Sons, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 130105-K, etc. (Philadelphia).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



I, Robert I. Kriebel, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Neose Technologies, Inc.



2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present
in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting.



| |  |  |  | /s/    ROBERT I.
KRIEBEL                                           
| |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |  |  | Robert I. Kriebel Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



August 7, 2003

Date
To: "Sara Waterson" <Waterson.Sara@epamail.epa.gov>, 

Cc: 

Bee 

Fw: York County Redesignation Conversion Factor 

t-=rom Lynorae Benjamin/R4/USEPA/US- Friday 09/07/2012 06:37PM 

From: "Coolidge, Leslie N." [coolidln@dhec.sc.gov] 

Sent: 09/06/2012 01:10PM AST 

To: Sara Waterson 

Cc: "Mason, Maeve" <masonmr@dhec.sc.gov>; Lynorae Benjamin; Dianna Smith 

Subject: Re: York County Redesignation Conversion Factor 

Sara, 

You can use . 0011 0231. 

Thanks, 

Leslie 

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Sara Waterson <Waterson.Sara@epamail.epa.gov> wrote: 

Maeve and LeslieThe safety margin for the budgets in the maintenance plan is in kg/day. Can you 

please send us your conversion factor to tons per day? 

Thank youSara 

Sara Waterson 

US EPA Region 4 

Regulatory Development Section 

Atlanta Federal Center 

61 Forsyth Street, SW 

Atlanta, GA 30303-8960 

(404) 562-9061 (office) 

(404) 562-9095 (fax) 

Waterson.Sara@epa.gov 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other 

confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you have 

received this communication in error, please do not print, copy, retransmit, 

disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also, please indicate to the sender that 

you have received this communication in error, and delete the copy you received.
No. 51831.

#### Tebor, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 113728-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that certain items marked “A” consist of earthenware articles composed of a nonvitrifled absorbent body, not artificially colored and composed wholly of clay, which articles are painted, colored, tinted, stained, enameled, gilded, printed, ornamented, or decorated. As to these items of merchandise, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained. The protests were abandoned as to all items not marked “A”. As to these items, the protests were dismissed.
(Reap. Dec. 10610)

#### Winter, Wolfe & Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 15569.

(Decided October 29,1963)

*Stein & Shostalc*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 herein:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by invoice No. 2 of the entry covered by the appeal for reappraisement enumerated on the attached Schedule, attached hereto and made a part hereof, consists of round steel bar, exported from Belgium.

> That all the merchandise covered by the appeal for reappraisement was entered subsequent to February 27,1958.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the merchandise the subject of the appeal for reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule is not included on the list of articles designated by the Secretary of the Treas-

> *430ury in T.D. 64521, as provided for in Section 6(a) of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, Public Law 927, 84th Congress, required to be valued in accordance with Section 402(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that at the time of exportation of the instant merchandise to the United States, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for export to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was $99.00 per Metric Ton plus $16.00 per Metric Ton size extra, less F.O.B. charges of $3,325 per Metric Ton.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that this appeal for re-appraisement may be deemed submitted for decision on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold export value, as that value is defined in section 402(b) 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, covered by invoice No. 2 of the entry covered by the appeal herein involved, and that such value was $99 per metric ton, plus $16 per metric ton size extra, less f.o.b. charges of $3,325 per metric ton.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
# L_2022165EN.01004601.xml

| 21.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 165/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 165/46

---

COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2022/962

of 20 June 2022

amending Decision 2014/386/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 23 June 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/386/CFSP (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 23 June 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/386/CFSP (1).

| (2) | The Union does not recognise and continues to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation as a violation of international law. The Union remains steadfast in its commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders and dedicated to fully implementing its non-recognition policy. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Union does not recognise and continues to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation as a violation of international law. The Union remains steadfast in its commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders and dedicated to fully implementing its non-recognition policy.

| (3) | On the basis of a review of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the restrictive measures set out therein should be renewed until 23 June 2023. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of a review of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the restrictive measures set out therein should be renewed until 23 June 2023.

| (4) | Decision 2014/386/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Decision 2014/386/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Article 5 of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the second paragraph is replaced by the following:

‘This Decision shall apply until 23 June 2023.’

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Luxembourg, 20 June 2022.

For the Council

The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES

---

(1)  Council Decision 2014/386/CFSP of 23 June 2014 concerning restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol (OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 70).

1

---
CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this quarterly report of Chugach Electric Association, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004, I, Evan J.
Griffith, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

(a) This quarterly report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(b) The information contained in this quarterly report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Date:  May 14, 2004

                                                     /s/ Evan J. Griffith
                                                     Evan J. Griffith
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OFTHE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF TUESDAY MORNING CORPORATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350

 

I, Stephanie Bowman, theChief Financial Officer of Tuesday Morning Corporation, hereby certify that:

 
| 1.     |   | The quarterly report on  Form 10-Q of Tuesday Morning Corporation for the period ended  March 31, 2008 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 above-mentioned report fairly presents, in all material  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tuesday  Morning Corporation.                                                      |

 

 
| Date: May 5, 2008 | By:    | /s/ Stephanie Bowman                      |
|------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------|
|                   |   | Stephanie Bowman  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
No. 68559.

Appeal 5141.

#### Cragstan Corporation *v.*United States.

affirmed December 12, 1963. C.A.D. 832.
<PAGE>   1
Exhibit 23.1



                       Consent of Independent Accountants


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (File No. 333-    ) of our reports dated September 10, 1997, except for
Note 18 for which the date is October 1, 1997, on our audits of the consolidated
financial statements and financial statement schedule of Hypercom Corporation as
of June 30, 1997 and 1996 and for the three years in the period ended June 30,
1997, appearing in the prospectus of Hypercom Corporation, dated November 13,
1997, filed with the Securities Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b)
under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

                                        Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.


COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
Phoenix, Arizona
November 18, 1997
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-6086

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BURTON BRAXTON HAGWOOD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. W. Craig Broadwater, District Judge. (3:00-CR-00013-WCB-1; 3:00-CV-00113-WCB) Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: March 6, 2006 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Burton Braxton Hagwood, Appellant Pro Se. Samuel Gerald Nazzaro, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Burton Braxton Hagwood, a federal prisoner, seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying as successive his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hagwood has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 25, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 73386]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23512]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail, USPS Ground Advantage, Parcel 
Select & Parcel Return Service Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: October 25, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 16, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail, USPS Ground Advantage, Parcel Select & 
Parcel Return Service Contract 1 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2024-15, CP2024-15.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-23512 Filed 10-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
A89A1685.

#### HOLMBERG et al. v. PAJOT et al.

(390 SE2d 414)

Decided January 8, 1990

Rehearing denied January 22, 1990

*Lefkoff, Duncan, Grimes & Dermer, Joseph Lefkoff, Kimberly A.*
      *276
      *Richardson,*for appellants.

*275Carley, Chief Judge.

In May of 1987, appellee-defendants conveyed real property in Georgia by warranty deed to appellant-plaintiffs. In April of 1988, appellants filed suit, alleging that appellees had failed to disclose a latent defect in the property. Appellees, who are nonresidents, answered and subsequently moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The trial court granted appellees’ motion to dismiss. This court granted appellants’ application for an interlocutory appeal from that order.

Appellants have alleged a viable tort claim based upon the breach by appellees of the duty that is owed by a seller of realty in this state to disclose latent defects in the property that are known to him, but which are undiscoverable by a prospective buyer. See *Wilhite v. Mays,*239 Ga. 31 (235 SE2d 532) (1977). It follows that the trial court erred in granting appellees’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. See *Edelschick v. Blanchard,*177 Ga. App. 410, 411 (2) (339 SE2d 628) (1985).

*Judgment reversed.*

*McMurray, P. J., and Beasley, J., concur.*

*276
      *Long, Aldridge & Norman, Phillip A. Bradley, Vincent, Chorey, Taylor & Fell, Kenneth I. Sokolov, R. Chris Irwin & Associates, R. Chris Irwin,*for appellees.
Oskar Environmental Inc.

95 Cypress Drive

Youngsville, NC 27596

www.oskarsales.com

ph: (919) 570-2862

fx: (919) 570-2863

mobile: (919) 971-2017

esithes@oskarsales.com

Your solution to cleaner air...

January 29, 2010

James H. Cunningham, Ph.D.

Senior Research Environmental Science Engineer

RTI International

919.541.8834

Email: jcunningham@rti.org

Re: Budget Summary 

Dear James:

The following budgetary project summary is broken out per your request. Industrial Air Quality, 

Inc. and Oskar Air Products, Inc. has formally joined together to become Oskar Environmental Inc. 

This allows us to offer better engineering and support to our customers. The numbers have 

slightly changed once we started to break the items out. We also included an estimated freight 

cost not previous provided.

System #1

• 6,000 CFM Fan, HEPA Housing $22,000.00

• Ducting and installation $16,000.00 

• Estimated Freight $2,000.00 

• HEPA Replacement Costs $2,600.00 

System #2

• 12,000 CFM Fan, HEPA Housing $25,000.00

• Ducting and installation $18,000.00 

• Estimated Freight $3,800.00

• HEPA Replacement Costs $4,800.00 

System #3

• 18,000 CFM Fan, HEPA Housing $32,000.00

• Ducting and installation $20,000.00 

• Estimated Freight $4,750.00

• HEPA Replacement Costs $8,800.00 

System #4

• 40,000 CFM Fan, HEPA Housing $62,000.00

• Ducting and installation $22,000.00 

• Estimated Freight $8,000.00

• HEPA Replacement Costs $12,600.00 

Does not include:

• Electrical controls, components or labor 

• Lift equipment for installation 

• Mounting stands for HEPA housings 

• Removal of existing fans 

• Wall or ceiling penetrations 

• Freight, taxes and customs if required 

1
Oskar Environmental Inc.

95 Cypress Drive

Youngsville, NC 27596

www.oskarsales.com

ph: (919) 570-2862

fx: (919) 570-2863

mobile: (919) 971-2017

esithes@oskarsales.com

Your solution to cleaner air...

General Description (Fans)

• Backward Incline 

• Class III, Arrangement 9 

• 304 Stainless on all parts in contact with gas stream 

• Drain with Plug 

• Quick inspection door 

• Slide gate discharge damper 

• Premium efficient motors 

General Description (HEPA Housings)

• 14/16 gauge, 304 Stainless Steel 

• Standard pressure rating of 4” W.G. (positive or negative) 

• Double inlet and outlet adapters 

• Access door (right & left side) 

• Lift-off doors with positive pressure knobs 

• ANSI/ SMACNA approved 

• Replaceable unit hardware and tracks 

• Magnehelic gauges 

General Description (Clamp Together Ducting):

• Stainless steel (304) welded seam ducting 

• Elbows, transitions, reducers, and Clamps 

Again, thanks for the opportunity to present this budgetary quote. If this project moves forward, I 

would suggest we schedule a plant visit along with one of my project engineers. We produce all 

AutoCAD drawings in house and can provide any of the component data per request.

Regards,

Ed Sithes

President

Oskar Environmental Inc.

(919) 570-2862, office

(919) 971-2017, cell 

2
August 30, 1954

No. 58360.

Suit 4794.

#### A. N. Deringer, Inc. *v.*United States.

Abstract 57452 affirmed May 27, 1954. C. A. D. 565.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
ACCOMPANYING CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                           0000877908
<NAME>                          Centigram Communications Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              OCT-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 NOV-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAY-01-1999
<CASH>                                         6,271
<SECURITIES>                                   36,788
<RECEIVABLES>                                  16,303
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    2,998
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               63,874
<PP&E>                                         41,571
<DEPRECIATION>                                 36,129
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 79,189
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          20,041
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       90,509
<OTHER-SE>                                     (31,361)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   79,189
<SALES>                                        20,835
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               20,835
<CGS>                                          8,768
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  8,768
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               12,819
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (82)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   110
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (192)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (192)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.03)



</TABLE>