alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 229

Commemorating the 150th anniversary of the establishment of the Chicago

Board of Trade.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 12, 1998

Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN (for herself and Mr. DURBIN) submitted the following

resolution; which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Commemorating the 150th anniversary of the establishment

of the Chicago Board of Trade.

Whereas the Chicago Board of Trade, which celebrates in

April 1998 the 150th anniversary of its establishment,

has been an essential contributor to financial growth in

Chicago, Illinois, and our Nation;

Whereas futures markets were developed by finance pioneers

in Chicago and today Chicago remains the commercial

crossroads of the world;

Whereas the Chicago Board of Trade, the oldest and largest

futures and options exchange, continues its tradition of

innovation, functioning as a global financial leader;

Whereas the Chicago Board of Trade’s 150 years of accomplishments include such major achievements as inventing
2

•SRES 229 ATS

grain futures, founding the world’s premier trade clearing

system, launching the first stock options exchange, developing the first interest rate futures, advancing the use of

technology with its electronic trading system, and constructing the largest and most technologically advanced

trading floor in the world;

Whereas the Chicago Board of Trade and its members have

achieved success while adhering to the highest standards

of uncompromising integrity; and

Whereas the Chicago Board of Trade will continue as a

world-leading financial institution into the next millennium: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate—

2 (1) congratulates the Chicago Board of Trade

3 and the city of Chicago, Illinois, on the 150th anni4 versary of the establishment of the exchange; and

5 (2) expresses its wishes for continued years of

6 innovation, service, and leadership by the Chicago

7 Board of Trade into the next millennium.

Æ
Before the First Division,

January 15, 1948

No. 52116.

protest 981968-G (San Francisco).

#### Shun Ying Chong & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” are similar in all material respects to the articles the subject of *Rolls Razor, Inc.*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 271, C. D. 480) and Abstract 51306, the claim at 20 percent under paragraph 1558 was sustained.
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Annual Report of Utilicraft Aerospace Industries, Inc. (the “Registrant”)on Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31, 2006 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, RandyMoseley, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certifyto the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss..1350, as adoptedpursuant to ss..906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Registrant.

Date: April 27,2007

By: /s/ Randy MoseleyRandy Moseley,Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

----
[Letterhead of KPMG LLP]                Exhibit 99.2a




                         Independent Accountants' Report


The Boards of Directors
Countrywide Financial Corporation:

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying
Management Assertion, that Countrywide Financial Corporation and subsidiaries
 including its wholly-owned subsidiary, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. ("CHL"),
 and Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P., a wholly-owned subsidiary of CHL,
 (collectively, the "Company") complied with the minimum servicing standards
 set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single
Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) as of and for the year ended
 December 31, 2005. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance
with those minimum servicing standards. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on management's assertion about the Company's compliance based on our
examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,
accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's
compliance with the minimum servicing standards specified above and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our
 examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company's compliance
 with the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion, management's assertion that Countrywide Financial Corporation
 and subsidiaries, including its wholly-owned subsidiary, Countrywide Home
Loans, Inc. ("CHL"), and Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, L.P., a wholly-owned
 subsidiary of CHL, complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing
 standards as of and for the year ended December 31, 2005 is fairly stated,
in all material respects.


                               /s/ KPMG LLP


March 3, 2006



                                [Letterhead of Countrywide Home Loans]



                                Management Assertion


March 3, 2006


As of and for the year ended December 31, 2005, Countrywide Financial
Corporation and subsidiaries, including its wholly-owned subsidiary,
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. ("CHL"), and Countrywide Home Loans Servicing,
 L.P., a wholly-owned subsidiary of CHL, (collectively, the "Company") have
complied in all material respects with the minimum servicing standards set
forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single
Attestation for Mortgage Bankers. As of and for this same period, the Company
had in effect a mortgage bankers' (fidelity) bond in the amount of $200 million
 and an errors and omissions policy in the amount of $100 million and $130
 million for the period January 1, 2005 to August 1, 2005 and for the period
 from August 1, 2005 to December 31, 2005, respectively.





/s/ Steve Bailey
---------------------------
Senior Managing Director and
Chief Executive Officer, Loan Administration


/s/ Kevin Meyers
---------------------------
Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer,
Loan Administration
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-1337V

Filed: May 12, 2017

Unpublished

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MARGUERITE ACKER, *

*

Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement (Non-Table);

v. * Concession; Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine;

* Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Administration (“SIRVA”); Special

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Processing Unit (“SPU”)

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA, for petitioner.

Althea W. Davis, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On October 13, 2016, Marguerite Acker (“petitioner”) filed a petition for 

compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. 

§300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered shoulder 

injuries from an influenza (“flu”) vaccination administered on October 16, 2015. Petition 

at preamble. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) of the 

Office of Special Masters.

On May 12, 2017, respondent filed a Rule 4(c) Report conceding that petitioner is 

entitled to compensation. Rule 4(c) Rep. at 1. Based on the opinion of the medical 

personnel at the Division of Injury Compensation Programs, Department of Health and 

Human Services (“DICP”), respondent has concluded that petitioner’s alleged injury is 

consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”). Id. at 4. 

No other causes for petitioner’s injury were identified. Id. In addition, petitioner’s 

 1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

medical records demonstrate satisfaction of the statutory six-month sequela 

requirement. Id. Based on the record as it now stands, respondent believes entitlement

to Vaccine Act compensation is appropriate. Id.

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
DENIED and Opinion Filed December 14, 2022 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00467-CV 

IN RE LSP PRODUCTS GROUP, INC., Relator 

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 1 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-21-02738-A 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle 

Opinion by Justice Reichek 

Before the Court is relator’s May 17, 2022 petition for writ of mandamus 

wherein relator challenges the trial court’s order denying relator’s motion to transfer 

venue. 

Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court 

clearly abused its discretion and that relator lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In 

re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. 

proceeding). After reviewing relator’s petition, real parties in interest’s response, 

relator’s reply, and the record before us, we conclude that relator has failed to 

demonstrate a clear abuse of discretion. 
 –2– 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

52.8(a). 

We also lift the stay issued by this Court’s May 18, 2022 Order. 

220467F.P05 

/Amanda L. Reichek/

AMANDA L. REICHEK 

JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF POWERTEL, INC. FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         535,366
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,723
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     22,017
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               572,014
<PP&E>                                         357,094
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (23,623)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,343,845
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           38,086
<BONDS>                                        760,213
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          4
<COMMON>                                           269
<OTHER-SE>                                     434,414
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,343,845
<SALES>                                          7,382
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,738
<CGS>                                           16,734
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   83,563
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (30,396)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,638
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (17,429)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (17,429)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (17,429)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
No. 62881.

#### John Edgar Staren *v.*United States,

protests 224310-K, etc. (Nogales).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beef similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *J. H. Brown et al.*(46 C.C.P.A. 1, C.A.D. 686), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 82 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 82

  Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers 
 Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from their positions 
in connection with the present operations against the Federal Republic 
                             of Yugoslavia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 12, 1999

 Mr. Campbell submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
          referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers 
 Resolution, to remove United States Armed Forces from their positions 
in connection with the present operations against the Federal Republic 
                             of Yugoslavia.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. REMOVAL OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM THE FEDERAL 
              REPUBLIC OF YUGOSLAVIA.

    Pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 
1544(c)), the Congress hereby directs the President to remove United 
States Armed Forces from their positions in connection with the present 
operations against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia within 30 days 
after the passage of this resolution or within such longer period as 
may be necessary to effectuate their safe withdrawal.
                                 <all>
```
Before the Third Division,

December 26, 1947

No. 52088.

protests 21282-K, etc. (Boston, etc.).

#### Stone & Downer Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
# L_2022002EN.01000901.xml

| 6.1.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 2/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 2/9

---

Corrigendum to Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2124 of 2 December 2021 implementing Article 8a(1) of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in respect of Belarus

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 430I of 2 December 2021
  )

On page 7, in entry 178 (Valiantsina Genadzeuna KULIK), under ‘Identifying Information’:

for:

‘Gender: male’,

read:

‘Gender: female’;

on page 9, in entry 181 (Hanna Mikhailauna SAKALOUSKAYA), under ‘Identifying Information’:

for:

‘Gender: male’,

read:

‘Gender: female’.

---
No. 51516.

#### Protests 956901-G, etc., of Raylite Trading Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J..

The uncontradicted evidence disclosed that certain items of the merchandise consist of Christmas tree star lamps similar in all material respects to the merchandise which formed the subject of *New York Merchandise Co.*v. *United States*(16 Cust. Ct. 148, C. D. 1003). In accordance therewith the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the First Division,

March 23, 1961

No. 65316.

#### John Breuner Co. and Frank P. Dow Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 58/14183, etc. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of valances similar in all material respects to those the subject of *D. N. & E. Walter & Co. et al*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 26, C.D. 2098), the claim at 25 percent under the provision in paragraph 409, as modified, *supra,*for bamboo articles was sustained. The items marked “B,” stipulated to be the same as the merchandise involved in C.D. 2098, *supra,*were held dutiable at 16% percent under the provision in paragraph 412, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802), for manufactures of wood.
No. 57120.

protest 180697-K (Seattle).

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

Johnson, Judge:

The merchandise at issue in this case consists of headless-Iceland herring, salted, imported from Haugesund, Norway. The herring was invoiced in two lots. The lot described as 75/1 barrels was invoiced at a price of $29.40, and the lot described as 125/2 barrels was invoiced at a price of $16.20. The plaintiff claims that the net weight as returned by the collector’s office is excessive, for the reason that while the shipment consisted of 75 barrels and 125 half barrels, duty was assessed on an average weight of approximately 122 pounds for the barrels and 243 pounds for the half barrels, whereas duty should have been assessed upon the average of 243 pounds for the barrels and 122 pounds for the half barrels.

At the trial R. Flakstad, president of R. Flakstad & Co., Inc., the ultimate consignee of the herring, testified that the only proof he had was his invoice book; and that the 125 barrels were half barrels, which weighed approximately 122 pounds, and the 75 barrels were full barrels which weighed 240 pounds. He was of the opinion that the designation “125/2” on the invoice was an error and that it should have read “125 1/2.” The importer failed to show, however, that any independent weighing of the herring had taken place under his direction.

The acting deputy collector testified that the record shows there were 8 barrels weighed, aggregating a total weight, less the tare, of 122 pounds per barrel, and also that 13 barrels were weighed, aggregating a total weight, less the tare, of 242.769 pounds of fish per barrel. The witness testified that the 75 barrels which averaged 122 net pounds each and the 125 barrels which averaged 242.769 net pounds each were assessed for duty upon the basis of such weights.

The weights returned by the customs officials of imported merchandise are presumptively correct, and the burden is upon the importer to rebut this presumption by a preponderance of the evidence to the contrary. *United States*v. *Gage,*1 Ct. Cust. Appls. 439, T. D. 31503. Inasmuch as the importer was unable to furnish any evidence tending to establish that the barrels actually weighed less than shown by the return of the United States weigher, this court is constrained to enter judgment in favor of the Government.
Case No. 14,889.

#### UNITED STATES v. CRANSTON et al.

[3 Cranch, C. C. 289.]1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

April Term, 1828.

Constable—Sureties on Bond—Monet Collected.

The sureties in a constable’s bond are not liable for money collected-by the constable without legal process.

Debt upon a constable’s bond. The breach assigned was that the creditor, A. B., for whose use this suit was brought, had put a note into the hands of Cranston, the constable, to collect; that he collected the money, and refused to pay it over to the creditor. It appeared that he collected it without legal process.

Mr. Mason, for defendants,

denied that they were liable upon their bond for the money thus collected.

Mr. Wise, for plaintiff, and Mr. Mason, for defendants,

submitted the question to the court without argument.

1

 [Reported by Hon. William Cranch, Chief Judge.]

And

THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent),

said that the defendant (the constable) was not liable upon his official bond for this money, although he gave a receipt, as constable, for the note. His official duty only commences when he has legal process; and he is only liable officially, for money officially collected; that is, upon legal process..
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEFFINANCIAL OFFICER OF TUESDAY MORNING CORPORATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C §1350

 

I, Loren K. Jensen, the Chief Financial Officer of Tuesday MorningCorporation, hereby certify that:

 

1.             Thequarterly report on Form 10-Q of Tuesday Morning Corporation for theperiod ended March 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.             Theinformation contained in the above-mentioned report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of TuesdayMorning Corporation.

 
| Date: May 2, 2006 | By:    | /s/ Loren K. Jensen                      |   |
|------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   |   | Loren K. Jensen  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----