alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 10861)

#### Elof Hansson, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 726987-1/6; 831591-1/5; 736778-1/3.

(Decided November 18, 1964)

*Sharp & Bogan*for the plaintiff.

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

Rao, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, annexed to this decision and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> *487IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned, subject to tbe approval of the Court:

> 1. That the subject merchandise consists of hardboard exported from Sweden as to which the Secretary of the Treasury issued a finding of dumping, published in 89 T.D. 197, T.D. 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 duty purposes.

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

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

> 6. That as to all other items or 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 said schedule A, 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.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of Standard Pacific Corp., a Delaware corporation (the Company), for
purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  |  | the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 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, as amended, and
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: August 6, 2010



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/S/    KENNETH L.
CAMPBELL                       
|Kenneth L. Campbell                              
|Chief Executive Officer and President            
|                                                 
|/S/    JOHN M.
STEPHENS                          
|John M. Stephens                                 
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
J~~Eu St~rss 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.0 20460 

~
IA

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 43

Disapproving the certification of the President under section 490(b) of the

Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 regarding foreign assistance for Mexico

during fiscal year 1999.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 24, 1999

Mr. MICA (for himself, Mr. GILMAN, Mr. TRAFICANT, Mr. ENGLISH, Mr.

BACHUS, Mr. BARR of Georgia, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. HUNTER, and Mr.

BURTON of Indiana) introduced the following joint resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in addition to

the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of

such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the certification of the President under section

490(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 regarding

foreign assistance for Mexico during fiscal year 1999.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. DISAPPROVAL OF DETERMINATION OF PRESI4 DENT REGARDING MEXICO.

5 Pursuant to subsection (d) of section 490 of the For6 eign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2291j), Congress

7 disapproves the determination of the President with re-
2

•HJ 43 IH

1 spect to Mexico for fiscal year 1999 that is contained in

2 the certification (transmittal no. 99–15) submitted to

3 Congress by the President under subsection (b) of that

4 section on February 26, 1999.

5 SEC. 2. WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT TO WITHHOLD ASSIST6 ANCE FOR MEXICO.

7 (a) WAIVER.—Notwithstanding subsections (e) and

8 (f) of section 490 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,

9 the requirement to withhold United States assistance and

10 to vote against multilateral development bank assistance

11 contained in such subsection (e) shall not apply with re12 spect to Mexico until March 1, 2000, if at any time after

13 the date of the enactment of this joint resolution, the

14 President submits to Congress a determination and certifi15 cation described in subsection (b) of this section.

16 (b) DETERMINATION AND CERTIFICATION.—A deter17 mination and certification described in this subsection is

18 a determination and certification consistent with section

19 490(b)(1)(B) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 that

20 the vital national interests of the United States require

21 that the assistance withheld pursuant to section 490(e)(1)

22 of such Act be provided for Mexico and that the United

23 States not vote against multilateral development bank as24 sistance for Mexico pursuant to section 490(e)(2) of such

25 Act.
3

•HJ 43 IH

1 SEC. 3. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

2 For purposes of section 490(d) of the Foreign Assist3 ance Act of 1961, this joint resolution shall be deemed

4 to have been enacted within 30 calendar days after Feb5 ruary 26, 1999.

Æ
March 26, 1959

No. 62906.

Suit 4930.

#### Anderson Organization *v.*United States.

C.D. 1885 affirmed December 16, 1958. C.A.D. 694.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-92,230-01

EX PARTE VIKRAM SINGH VIRK, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. W15-75769-S(A) IN THE 282ND DISTRICT COURT

FROM DALLAS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and

the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07. According to

the record, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing on September 25, 2020, but the transcript of

the hearing was not forwarded to this Court. Under Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal

Procedure, a reporter is required to transcribe a hearing within fifteen days of its conclusion and then

to immediately forward the transcript to the district clerk in the county of conviction. Id. at § 3(d). 

After receiving the transcript, the district clerk is required to forward it, among other things, to this

Court. Id.; see also TEX. R. APP. P. 73.4(b)(4).

The district clerk shall serve the reporter in Applicant’s case with a copy of this order and
2

then either forward to this Court the transcript of the evidentiary hearing or certify in writing that the

reporter has not transcribed the hearing. The district clerk shall comply with this order within thirty

days from the date of this order.

Filed: March 1, 2021

Do not publish
Exhibit 23.2






CONSENT OF IVAN C. MACHADO
  March 22, 2010
  I hereby give my consent to the use of my name and references to, excerpts from, and summaries of, the following reports which have been incorporated into the Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the "AIF") and which are incorporated as exhibits to the annual report on Form 40-F of Jaguar
Mining Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2009:
  (a)
the Technical Report on the Turmalina Expansion Feasibility Study dated September 9, 2008;
  (b)
the Technical Report on the Paciência Gold Project Santa Isabel Mine dated August 7, 2007; and
  (c)
the Technical Report on the Caeté Expansion Feasibility Study dated September 15, 2008.
  I also hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of the aforementioned Technical Reports information contained in the AIF and the annual report on Form 40-F, into the Registration Statement on Form F-10 (Registration No. 333-160040) and Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-144969) of
Jaguar Mining Inc.
 Sincerely,
  
 GRAPHIC
 Ivan C. Machado, M.Sc. P.E., P.Eng.
 On behalf of himself and TechnoMine Services, LLC
CL 

### ORDER REGARDING SCR 111(4) PETITIO T E KLIN

. 4 , 

## rgiteit • P

J.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF No. 70066 DAVID A. FRANCIS, BAR NO. 7705. 

# FILE JUN 1 7 2016 This is a petition informing this court of the criminal conviction of attorney David A. Francis for DUI in Las Vegas Municipal Court Case No. C1114388A. As this matter has been included in the conditional plea agreement approved in 

### In re Discipline of Francis, Docket No. 70020 (June 14, 2016, Order Approving Conditional Plea Agreement), we will take no further action in this matter and thus dismiss this petition. It is so ORDERED. J. Douglas

Gibbons cc: C. Stanley Hunterton, Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada Pitaro & Fumo, Chtd. Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada

(0)1947A er,
Third Addendum to the release 

Vaughn Index for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

As a result of Judicical Watch, Inc. litigation, additional items have been released

in full or in part. These documents are responsive to one or more of the following requests

made to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for Enron-related document under the

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552: FY02-26 (Judicial Watch I), FY02-43

(Associated Press), FY02-61 (Los Angeles Times), FY02-64 (Judicial Watch II), FY02-65

(Wall StreetJournal), FY02-74 (Bloomberg), FY02-84 (Washington Post), FY02-105 ( San

Diego Union Tribune) and FY02-107 (Betsy Miller)

Response

Number Description Exemptions

195 January 14, 2002 e-mail from Don

Chamblee to general counsel Cynthia

Marlette concerning FERC-CFTC

responsibilities re: commodity trading

juridiction. (1 page)

Release

237 January 14, 2002 e-mail from Robert

Christin to Don Chamblee regarding FERCCFTC responsibilities re: commodity trading

jurisdiction. (1 page)

Release.

495B Proposed Term Sheet concerning future

Enron role in New England Power Pool.

Release.

572 December 3, 2001 e-mail from Susan Court

to Daniel Larcamp with copy to Cynthia

Marlette and Moira Notargiacomo

concerning Enron bankruptcy. (1 page)

Release.

655D-K December 7 and 10, 2001 memoranda

concerning Enron collapse. (8 pages)

Release. 
810 December 10, 2001 e-mail from Andrea

Wolfman to K. Bruno concerning audits. 

(1 page)

Release.

811 December 10, 2001 e-mail from Andrea

Wolfman to K. Bruno concerning audits. 

(1 page)

Release.

1513 November 30, 2001 e-mail from Daniel

Larcamp to Michael Coleman, Alice

Fernandez, and M. McLaughlin with copies

to S. Cannon, D. Galinas, D. Lane, and C.

Marlette concerning Enron.

Release. 

1554 January 17, 2002 e-mail from Michael

Bardee to Andrea Wolfman concerning

jurisdiction over electronic trading. (1 page)

Release.
No. 51227.

#### Protests 42242-K, etc., of Uddo Taormina Corp. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise consist of cheese similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Scaramelli*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 270, C. D. 706), Abstract 42146, and Abstract 48269. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance of *2}i*percent should have been made in the weight of the cheese by the collector in computing the duty thereon to compensate for the weight of the inedible coverings on the outside of the cheese. The protests were sustained to this extent.
Civil Rights

Ensuring Equal Access to ALL FEMA Programs, Services, and Benefits.

Contact FEMA Civil Rights Division 

if you feel you have been 

discriminated against based on:

Civil Rights Resource Line:

833-285-7448

fema.gov/civil-rights 

FEMA-CivilRightsOffice@fema.dhs.gov

Race

Color

National Origin 

Sex

Sexual Orientation

Religion 

Age 

Disability

English Proficiency

Economic Status

711 or Video Relay Service (VRS): 1-800-621-3362
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #18061 and #18062; HAWAII Disaster Number HI-00073]

# AGENCY:

U.S. Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 3.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Hawaii (FEMA-4724-DR), dated 08/10/2023.

*Incident:*                         Wildfires, including High Winds.                    

*Incident Period:*                         08/08/2023 and continuing.                    

# DATES:

Issued on 10/11/2023.

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         11/09/2023.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         05/10/2024.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of Hawaii, dated 08/10/2023, is hereby amended to expand the incident for this disaster to include high winds.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
      ( print page 72208)    
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Francisco Sánchez, Jr.,

Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience.

[FR Doc. 2023-23061 Filed 10-18-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
No. 56238.

protests 138646-K and 144259-K (Pembina).

#### W. F. Mackay *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

The protests were dismissed.
No. 60659.

#### Austin Motor Co., Ltd. *v.*United States,

protests 221062-K, 257009-K, and 257010-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It was stipulated that the items marked “A” consist of speedometers or parts thereof in chief value of metal similar in all material respects to the merchandise the subject of *Industrial Operations, Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 82, C. D. 1500), except that the speedometers and parts thereof in the cited case were designed and intended for use as parts of motorcycles whereas those at bar are intended for use as parts of automobiles. It was further stipulated that the items marked “B” consist of ammeters, not in chief value of glass, designed and fitted for use on Austin motorcars, the same in all material respects as those involved in *Lucas Electrical Services, Inc.,*and *Frank J. Eberle Co.*v. *United States*(36 Cust. Ct. 209, C. D. 1776). Accepting the stipulation as a statement of facts and following the cited authorities, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 31.4

CERTIFICATION

I, Charles R. Eyler, certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Cougar Biotechnology, Inc.; and
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |     |  |                                                              
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------
|                     |  |    
|Date: April 30, 2009 |  | By: |  | /s/    CHARLES R. EYLER                                      
|                     |  |     |  | Charles R. Eyler Treasurer and Senior Vice President, Finance
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-17-00395-CR

SHABAZ ANDREWS,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 12th District Court

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court No. 27658

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Shabaz Andrews pled guilty without the benefit of a plea bargain to Paragraph

One of a two paragraph indictment. Thus, he was convicted of aggravated assault with 

a deadly weapon/family violence, see TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(b)(1) (West 2011), 

and sentenced to 40 years in prison. We affirm.

Andrews has no complaint about the trial court’s judgment that was rendered. 

Rather, in one issue, he raises a double jeopardy complaint regarding Paragraph Two of 

the indictment which charged Andrews with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. 
Andrews v. State Page 2

See id. § 22.02(a)(2). The State has not tried to pursue a prosecution regarding Paragraph 

Two. 

The proper time to assert any potential claim of jeopardy which a defendant might 

have is in a future prosecution after he has been charged or indicted for the potentially 

jeopardy-barred offense. See Burks v. State, 876 S.W.2d 877, 889 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994); 

Keith v. State, 782 S.W.2d 861, 864 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989). At this time, that issue is far 

from ripe and is not properly before this Court. Id.; Garrett v. State, 749 S.W.2d 784, 804 

(Tex. Crim. App. 1988) (“The Court of Appeals had no power to decide that issue because 

the issue of double jeopardy could only arise if appellant were subsequently charged with 

some lesser included offense.”). Any attempt by this Court to address Andrews’ issue 

would be advisory and unauthorized. Garrett, 749 S.W.2d at 803. 

Accordingly, Andrews’ sole issue is dismissed, and the trial court’s judgment is 

affirmed.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins1

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed February 13, 2019

Do not publish

[CRPM]

 

1 The Honorable Al Scoggins, Senior Justice of the Tenth Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment of the 

Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 74.003, 75.002, 75.003 (West 2013).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>5
<CIK> 0000878748
<NAME> PolyMedica Industries, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. Dollars
       
<S> <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE> 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END> MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START> SEP-01-1996
<PERIOD-END> DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE> 1
<CASH>                                                                    14720
<SECURITIES>                                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                              4377
<ALLOWANCES>                                                                571
<INVENTORY>                                                                4703
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                          24680
<PP&E>                                                                     5954
<DEPRECIATION>                                                             4379
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                            73050
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                      4962
<BONDS>                                                                   25091
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                                     86
<OTHER-SE>                                                                42911
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                              73050
<SALES>                                                                    8662
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                           9011
<CGS>                                                                      4328
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                              3736
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                            524
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                            139
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                          703
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                             423
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                 12
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                         411
<DISCONTINUED>                                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                                                411
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                              0.05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                              0.05
        

</TABLE>
No. 52816.

#### Loewengart & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 131077-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.