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

September 9, 1954

No. 58371.

protest 222442-K (New York).

#### Wm. A. McMahan *v.*United States,

Johnson, Judge:

The articles involved in this case consist of various items of the type described in paragraph 1811 of the Tariff Act of 1930, but found not to have been produced prior to 1830. In the protest, as amended, plaintiff claims that additional duties under section 489 at the rate of 25 per centum of the value of the articles, amounting to $64.50, should not have been assessed, because the articles were not imported for sale.

The pertinent provision of section 489 reads as follows:

> * * * If any article described in paragraph 1811 and imported for sale is rejected as unauthentic in respect to the antiquity claimed as a basis for free entry, there shall be imposed, collected, and paid on such article, unless exported under customs supervision, a duty of 25 per centum of the value of such article in addition to any other duty imposed by law upon such article.

The plaintiff appeared in person at the trial and testified as follows: He has been in the insurance business for a period of 40 years and does not receive any income from antiques, but he is a collector of antiques. While abroad in 1951, he purchased a number of articles which he believed to be antiques from dealers in London and other places. He brought them in for use in his home or in his office. A few of the articles were questioned after they arrived here and his broker prepared. some statements for him to sign. On one of them, there were inserted the words “For sale,” which escaped his attention when signing it. He did not import any of the articles for sale, has not sold them, and still has them in his possession.

There was received in evidence, without objection on the part of the Government, an affidavit of B. P. Bartel, manager of the import department of the broker. It is stated therein:

> The affidavits referring to these antiques were prepared in this office, and on one of them the words “for sale” were inserted in error.

Mr. McMahan has been in the life insurance business for forty years, and has never been in any other business. The goods involved are all in his possession in his apartment or as a decoration in his office, and are all for his own personal use.

The plaintiff abandoned any claim as to the antiquity of the articles, and the case was submitted by both parties.

On the record presented, we hold that the articles involved herein were not imported for sale and are, consequently, not subject to an additional duty of 25 per centum of their value under the quoted provision of section 489, which is expressly limited to articles rejected under paragraph 1811 and imported for sale. *Mrs. Kimball G. Colby*v. *United States,*62 Treas. Dec. 571, T. D. 46010.

The protest is sustained as to the 25 per centum additional duty assessed under section 489. In all other respects, it is overruled. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

| 1)   | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,                and |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2)   | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Partnership. |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/                Nancy J. McGurk                                     |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Nancy                J. McGurk                                         |
| Chief                Financial Officer of the Managing General Partner |
| March                31, 2006                                          |
Exhibit 32.2
 
 
 
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In connection with the Amended Annual Report of Marine Growth Ventures, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended    December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Katherine A Ostruszka, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section     1350 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 (1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities     Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section     1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
 
 
 
 Date:   November 16, 2011
By:
/s/ Katherine A OstruszkaKatherine A Ostruszka

Chief Financial Officer & Controller

(Principal Financial & Accounting Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM RAINTREE'S 
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          16,863
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   32,284
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,663
<INVENTORY>                                      1,473
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                48,154
<PP&E>                                          38,583
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,356
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 170,540
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,002
<BONDS>                                          8,144
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                    (79,082)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   170,540
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               184,031
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  166,986
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                52,486
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 6,210
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,140
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (53,791)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (9,842)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (43,949)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,094)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (45,043)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (7.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J EFFREY E. W A LK ER, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. D R . S C O T T , i nd i vi du al and o ff i ci al c ap a c ity ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 10- 56970 D . C . N o . 2 : 1 0 -cv -0 5 6 2 9 -U A -P JW ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia A udr e yB . C ol l i ns , C hi e f J udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M a r c h 6, 2012 ** B efo re: B . F L E T C H E R , R E IN H A R D T , an dT A S H IM A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. Je ff re y E . W al ker, a C al i forni a s t at e pri soner, appeal s pro se fr om the di stri ct c o u rt ’ s o r d e rd e n y i n g h i s r e q u e s tt o p r o c e e di n f o rmap au p e r i s i n h i s 4 2 U . S. C. § 1983 a c t i on a l l e gi ng de l i be r a t e i ndi f f e r e nc e . W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28



# FI LED MA R 19 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 56970 2 U . S . C . § 1291. W e r e vi e w de novo the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s i nt e rpr e t a t i on a nd ap p lic a tio n o f

2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 ( g ) , A ndre w s v . C ervant es , 493 F . 3d 1047, 1052 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) , a n d f

o ra n ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n its d e n ia l o f

le a v e to p r o c e e din fo rm a p au p eri s, O ’

L oughl i n v . D oe , 9 2 0 F . 2 d6 1 4 , 6 1 6 (9 th C i r. 1 9 9 0 ). W e rev erse a nd r e m a nd. Th e d i s tr i c tc o u rti mp r o p e r l yd e n i e dW a l k e r ’ s r e q u e s tt o p r o c e e di n f o rma paupe r i s be c aus e W a l ke rm a de pl aus i bl e a l l e ga t i ons tha the w a s “ unde ri m m i ne nt da nge rof

s e r i ous phy s i c a l i nj ury ” a tthe t i m e he l odge d the c om pl a i nt , i nc l udi ng tha thi s r e pe a t e d pl a c e m e nti n doubl e - c e l l hous i ng w i thoutf i r s tc om pl e t i ng tr e a tm e n t f

o rc o p in g in th a t e n v ir o n m e n t c au s e dh is m e n ta l h e a lth to d e te r io r a te such thathe became sui ci dal and v i ol entt ow ar ds others . 28 U . S . C . § 1 91 5(g); se e a l s o An dr e ws , 493 F . 3d a t1055 ( a n e xc e pt i on t o the thr e e - s tr i ke s rul e e xi s t s “ i f the c om pl a i ntm a ke s apl aus i bl e a l l e ga t i on tha tthe pr i s one rf a c e d ‘ i m m i ne ntda nge rof se ri ou s physi ca l i nj ury’ atthe t i m e of f i l i ng ”) . T o the e xt e nttha tW a l ke rs e e ks apr e l i m i na ryi nj unc t i on, w e de nythe r e q u e s t. W a lk e rs h a ll b e a rh is o w n c o s ts o n ap p e a l. RE V E RS E D a n d RE MAND E D.
Exhibit 32





CERTIFICATION  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Human Pheromone Sciences, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, William P. Horgan and Gregory S. Fredrick certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

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



(2)

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







/s/ William P. Horgan

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)

August 14, 2008



/s/ Gregory S. Fredrick

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)

August 14, 2008
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-19-00291-CR

Zoila FREIRE,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR2613

Honorable Frank J. Castro, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 29, 2019

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

Appellant Zoila Freire pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance, penalty group 1, 

less than one gram. On September 28, 2018, Appellant’s adjudication of guilt was deferred, and 

Appellant was placed on community supervision. On April 3, 2019, the trial court amended 

Appellant’s community supervision conditions. Appellant now seeks to appeal from the trial

court’s April 3, 2019 order, which Appellant signed on March 29, 2019, modifying the conditions 

of Appellant’s deferred adjudication. 
04-19-00291-CR

- 2 -

On May 9, 2019, we advised Appellant that “an order modifying the terms or conditions 

of deferred adjudication is not in itself appealable.” See Davis v. State, 195 S.W.3d 708, 711 (Tex. 

Crim. App. 2006); Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977). We ordered 

Appellant to show cause in writing by May 24, 2019, why this appeal should not be dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction. See Davis, 195 S.W.3d at 711.

Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel timely filed a response. Counsel advised 

the court that “Appellant is requesting that the trial court amend the conditions of probation” based 

on Appellant’s claims that the conditions violate her constitutional rights, and counsel asks this 

court not to dismiss the appeal.

Appellant’s response does not cure the jurisdictional defect: “an order modifying the terms 

or conditions of deferred adjudication is not in itself appealable.” See Davis, 195 S.W.3d at 711; 

Basaldua, 558 S.W.2d at 5. Appellant’s response fails to show how this court has jurisdiction in 

this appeal. We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Davis, 195 S.W.3d at 711.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
# L_2022089EN.01000101.xml

| 17.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 89/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 89/1

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/436

of 10 March 2022

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Poivre de Penja’ (PGI))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Cameroon’s application to register the name ‘Poivre de Penja’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Cameroon’s application to register the name ‘Poivre de Penja’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Poivre de Penja’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Poivre de Penja’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Poivre de Penja’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.8. Other products listed in Annex I to the Treaty (spices etc.), as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

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

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 10 March 2022.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 472, 23.11.2021, p. 17.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
No. 63502.

protest 58/18375 (San Francisco).

#### Battat Imp-Export Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Johnson, Judge:

This is a protest against the collector’s assesment of duty on one case of merchandise claimed to have been short shipped.

When this case was called for trial, counsel for the Government moved to dismiss the protest on the ground of untimeliness. It appears from the official papers, which were received in evidence, that the entry was liquidated on January 29, 1957, and that the protest was filed on May 9, 1958, more than 1 year thereafter. Consequently, the protest is untimely and must be dismissed under section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930, which provides that a liquidation becomes final, unless a protest is filed within 60 days after the date of liquidation.

Furthermore, it appears from the testimony of E. M. Battat, president of the plaintiff company, that one case of cameras and one case of films were picked up at the pier by Customs Cartage, Inc., but, according to the official papers, the ease of films was not received at the appraiser’s stores. It is well settled that where merchandise has actually arrived in this country but is not found for delivery to the importer, no allowance in duties may be made, except that, under the provisions of section 563(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, the Secretary of the Treasury may, upon proof satisfactory to him, abate or refund duties where merchandise is lost or stolen while in the appraiser’s stores, or is injured or destroyed by accidental fire or other casualty, while in bonded warehouse, the appraiser’s stores, or in transportation under bond. *Mills & Gibb Corportion*v. *United States,*13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 72, T.D. *40933; Silberman-Becker Corp.*v. *United States,*27 C.C.P.A. (Customs) 79, C.A.D. 65; *H. S. Dorf & Co., Inc.*v. *United States,*35 Cust. Ct. 43, C.D. 1719. None of these exceptions is applicable in the instant case. Moreover, this court has no authority to grant or disallow an abatement or refund under the said section, nor has it authority to review on the merits a decision of the Secretary of the Treasury, or, in cases involving less than $25, of the collector, made pursuant thereto. *H. Z. Bernstein Co., Inc.*v. *United States,*41 Cust. Ct. 282, C.D. 2053.

For the reasons stated, the protest in this case must be dismissed. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
# L_2022164EN.01000101.xml

| 20.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 164/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 164/1

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/939

of 13 June 2022

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ (PDO))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Turkey’s application to register the name ‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Turkey’s application to register the name ‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Giresun Tombul Fındığı’ (PDO) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

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

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 13 June 2022.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 69, 10.2.2022, p. 15.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-45573) pertaining to the 1988 and 1990 Stock Option
Plans, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-88590) pertaining to the
1992 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-311419)
pertaining to the 1995 Stock Option Plan, and in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 33-333647) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan of Medicis
Pharmaceutical Corporation of our report dated August 7, 1998 with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Medicis Pharmaceutical
Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended June
30, 1998.

                                       /s/ ERNST & YOUNG, LLP

Phoenix, Arizona
September 23, 1998
No. 52434.

protest 136417-K (New York).

#### Abercrombie & Fitch Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all’ material respects as the gloves which were the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333). The claim at 50 percent ad valorem under paragraph 915, plus any additional duty applicable under paragraph 924, was therefore sustained.