alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 56264.

protest 170868-K (St. Albans).

#### C. S. Emery *&*Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

When the case was called for trial it "was stipulated that the involved pieces of wood were used in fences and structures in the condition *367as imported, and it was conceded by counsel for the defendant that the merchandise consists of pickets. On the record presented it was held that the merchandise in question is something more than lumber, i. e., pickets, made from lumber. The claims of the plaintiff were therefore sustained.
Exhibit 32.1

US BioEnergy Corporation

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 Annual Report of US BioEnergy Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the quarterly period ended December 31,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gordon W. Ommen, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(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.



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                                                                    
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 17, 2008 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Gordon W. Ommen                                                
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Gordon W. Ommen                                                    
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer and President (Principal
Executive Officer)
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 25, 2022. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, February 25, 2022 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A22D0243. LAUREN SPRAYBERRY et al. v. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF PUTNAM COUNTY, GEORGIA et al.
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 2021SUCV0138
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6853

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

AARON JUAREZ-GOMEZ, 

Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:11-cr-00375-D-1) 

Submitted: September 18, 2018 Decided: September 21, 2018

Before WILKINSON and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Aaron Juarez-Gomez, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2

PER CURIAM: 

Aaron Juarez-Gomez appeals the district court’s order denying his motions for 

reduction of sentence, confining his appeal to the court’s denial of his motion seeking a 

sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012). We have reviewed the record 

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. United States v. Juarez-Gomez, No. 5:11-cr-00375-D-1 (E.D.N.C. July 11, 2018). 

We deny Juarez-Gomez’s motions to appoint counsel and dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
Before the Third Division,

November 12, 1959

No. 63506.

protests 309422-K, etc. (New York).

#### “21” Brands, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C.C.P.A. 112, C.A.D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited, it was held that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protests were sustained to this extent.
Exhibit 99.10

Ref.: 1772.19098

March 7, 2014

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)



|Re: | Evaluation and Audit of the P&NG Reserves of Penn West Petroleum Ltd.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (as of December 31, 2013)
| | -------------------------

Dear Sirs:

We refer to our report dated January 30, 2014 entitled Evaluation and Audit of the P&NG Reserves of Penn West Petroleum Ltd. (Penn
West) (as of December 31, 2013) (the Sproule Report).

We hereby consent to the inclusion of, or incorporation by reference
of and reference to, the Sproule Report in Penn Wests:

(i) Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2013;

(ii) Registration Statement on Form F-3 (No. 333-171675); and

(iii) press release regarding 2013 year-end results.

(collectively, the Disclosure Documents).

We have read the Disclosure Documents and have no reason to believe that there are any misrepresentations in the information contained therein that is derived
from the Report, or that is within our knowledge as a result of the services performed by us in connection with the Report.



Sincerely,SPROULE ASSOCIATES LIMITED/s/ Gary R. Finnis, P.Eng.Gary R. Finnis, P.Eng.Supervisor, Engineering and Partner
For assistance reading the documents please call Jamie Strong at 202-566-0056

Health Effects Support Document for Perfluorooctane Sulfonate EPA 822-R-16-002

Health Effects Support Document for Perfluorooctanoic Acid EPA 822-R-16-003

Drinking Water Health Advisory for Perfluorooctane Sulfonate EPA 822-R-16-004

Drinking Water Health Advisory for Perfluorooctanoic Acid EPA 822-R-16-005
No. 52819.

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

petition 6678-R (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

After a careful consideration of the evidence, the court was of opinion that the petitioner acted without intention' to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
<Page>


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the use in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 2 to
Registration Statement No. 333-105253 of Hartford Life Insurance Company
Separate Account Two on Form N-4, of our report dated February 19, 2003 of
Hartford Life Insurance Company relating to the financial statements as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, and of our report dated
February 21, 2003 of Hartford Life Insurance Company Separate Account Two
relating to the financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31,
2002, appearing in the Statement of Additional Information, which is a part of
such Registration Statement, and to the reference to us under the headings
"Experts" in such Statement of Additional Information.

Deloitte & Touche LLP
Hartford, Connecticut
October 6, 2003
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-50565

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Karl Edward Butler, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 6:01-CR-124-2

Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Karl Edward Butler appeals the sentence imposed upon revocation of 

his supervised release. He contends that the district court erred in relying on 

a bare allegation to determine that he committed a Grade A violation of his 

conditions of supervision. As Butler acknowledges, because he failed to raise 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 28, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-50565 Document: 00516257012 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/28/2022
No. 21-50565

2

this argument in the district court, our review is for plain error only. See 

Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). 

We have held “that it is error for a district court to rely on a bare arrest 

record at sentencing because it does not provide sufficient indicia of 

reliability to satisfy due process.” United States v. Zarco-Beiza, 24 F.4th 477, 

482 (5th Cir. 2022)(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Further, 

a district court errs “when it relies on a bare allegation of a new law violation

contained in a revocation petition.” United States v. Foley, 946 F.3d 681, 687

(5th Cir. 2020). There is more here, though, than a bare arrest record or a 

claim in a revocation petition. The extra is what Butler himself admitted.

One of Butler’s alleged violations of his conditions of supervision 

involved his arrest and charge for a state offense in 2020. Butler pled true to 

this allegation and admitted conduct underlying the arrest. Although he 

argues that his admissions were insufficient to support reliance as to one

aspect of the offense charged, he fails to show an error that is “clear or 

obvious.” Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135. Accordingly, the district court’s 

judgment is AFFIRMED.

Case: 21-50565 Document: 00516257012 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/28/2022
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-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006 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)

November 13, 2006



/s/ Gregory S. Fredrick

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)

November  13, 2006
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Nutraceutical International Corporation (the "Company") for
the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank W. Gay II, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:



/s/FRANK W. GAY IIFrank W. Gay II Chairman of the Board
and Chief Executive OfficerDate: July 31, 2008


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

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Nutraceutical International Corporation (the "Company") for
the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Cory J. McQueen, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



/s/CORY J. MCQUEENCory J. McQueen Vice President and
Chief Financial OfficerDate: July 31, 2008


Signed
originals of these written statements required by Section 906 have 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.

---



QuickLinks
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 21.1


America West Airlines, Inc.
Incorporated in Delaware
Doing business as AWA


The Leisure Company
Incorporated in Delaware
Doing business as Leisure Co.
**Exhibit
      1**


**Management's
        Assertion Concerning Compliance**
 **with
        USAP Minimum Servicing Standards**
  March
        21,
        2006
  As
        of and
        for the year ended December 31, 2005, GMAC Mortgage Corporation and its subsidiaries
        (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* *Program
        for Mortgage Bankers* ("USAP").
  As
        of and
        for this same period, the Company had in effect a fidelity bond and errors
        and omissions
        policy in the amounts of $350,000,000 and $100,000,000
        respectively.
   /s/
        Jim Hillsman
 Jim
        Hillsman
 Chief
        Operating Officer
 GMAC
        Residential Holding Corp
  /s/
        Dave Bricker
 Dave
        Bricker
 Chief
        Financial Officer
 GMAC
          Residential Holding Corp
 /s/
        Tony Renzi
 Tony
        Renzi
 Executive
        Vice President
 National
        Servicing Administration
 GMAC
        Residential Holding Corp
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-16-0000134 27-NOV-2018 08:51 AM
AMENDMENT #1 TO THE
ROBERT FARR
EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
 THIS AMENDMENT BANK OF BIRMINGHAM. ROBERT FARR
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 NOW, THEREFORE,
 1.
    
    The following sentence is added to the end of Paragraph 4 of the Agreement:Reimbursement under this Paragraph 4 shall be made in accordance with the Banks expense
reimbursement policies, but in no event later than the last day of the calendar year following
the calendar year in which the expenses are incurred. Reimbursement under this Paragraph 4
shall not affect the expenses eligible for reimbursement in any other calendar year and cannot
be liquidated or exchanged for any other benefit.2.
    
    The second paragraph of Paragraph 31 is amended as follows:
  3.
    
    Paragraph 32 is amended as follows:




---



##### 



4.
    
    The a third paragraph of Paragraph 32 is amended as follows:
  5.
    
    A new subsection (g) is added to Paragraph 33 as follows:
  6.
    
    The following is added to the end Paragraph 34 of the Agreement:In no event shall payments be made under this Paragraph 34, unless the Executive has incurred a
Separation from Service as defined Section 409A and the Final Regulations promulgated
thereunder. In addition, notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, if at the
time of a termination of this Agreement, (i) Executive is a specified employee as defined in
Section 409A, and the regulations and guidance thereunder in effect at the time of such
termination, and, (ii) any of the payments or benefits provided hereunder may constitute
deferred compensation under Section 409A, then, and only to the extent required by such
provisions, the date of payment of such payments or benefits otherwise provided shall be
delayed until the earlier of six (6) months following the date of termination or Executives
death. Any such payment or series of payments to be made due to a Separation from Service
shall commence no earlier than the first day of the seventh month following the Separation from
Service, provided that to the extent permitted by Section 409A of the Code, only payments
scheduled to be paid during the first 6 months after the date of such Separation from Service
shall be delayed and such delayed payments shall be paid in a single sum on the first day of
the seventh month following the date of such Separation from Service.
 2




---



##### 



7.
    
    A new Paragraph 54 is added to the Agreement as follows:
  IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 BANK OF BIRMINGHAM
    
    
    
    ROBERT FARRBy:
    
    /s/ Charles T. Pryde
    
    
    
    /s/ Robert FarrCharles T. Pryde
 3
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TIMOTHY GLINTON,

Appellant,

v.

U.S. BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR THE REGISTERED HOLDERS OF 

STRUCTURED ASSET SECURITIES CORPORATION, MORTGAGE 

PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2003-39EX,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-60

[April 6, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Barry Stone, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. 

CACE20012592.

H. Dillon Graham, III of Graham Legal, P.A., Coral Gables, for appellant.

Kimberly S. Mello and Arda Goker of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Orlando, 

for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., DAMOORGIAN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 54490.

#### Blousecraft Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 156607-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Fobd, J.

The protests were dismissed.
No. 51250.

#### Protests 92093-K, etc., of Italian Importing Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decisions cited the following allowances were made to compensate for the weight of the inedible substance on the outside of the cheese: (1) 2)4 percent for the 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; and (2) 1 percent for the cheese similar to the Reggiano cheese the subject of *Scaramelli*v. *United States, supra.*The protests were sustained to this extent.
Amendment to Global Entertainment Corporation 2000 Long Term Incentive Plan.



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 AMENDMENT 
 TO THE 
 GLOBAL ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION 
 2000 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN 
  
 Effective as of February 1, 2001, Global Entertainment Corporation (the “Company”) adopted the Global Entertainment Corporation 2000 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”). By this instrument, the Company desires to amend
the Plan to increase the number of shares of Global Entertainment Corporation stock available under the Plan. 
  
 1. This Amendment shall amend only that Section specified herein and those Sections not amended hereby shall remain in full force and effect. 

 
 2. Section 5.1 of the Plan, which sets forth the number of shares of Stock
subject to the Plan, is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 
  
 5.1 NUMBER OF SHARES. Subject to adjustment provided in paragraph 10.1, the aggregate number of shares of Stock reserved and
available for Awards shall be seven hundred fifty thousand (750,000). 
  
 3. This Amendment shall be effective as of February 1, 2001. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized representative on the 23rd day of July, 2001. 
  

	 GLOBAL ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION

		
	 By
	 	 /s/ Richard Kozuback


		
	 Its
	 	 President/CEO
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





In connection with the Annual Report of
SRKP 5, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Richard A. Rappaport, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to
my knowledge:





(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/ Richard A. RappaportRichard
      A. RappaportPrincipal
      Executive OfficerMarch
      23, 2010
# L_2022221EN.01006501.xml

| 26.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 221/65 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 221/65

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/1427

of 19 August 2022

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Nagykörűi ropogós cseresznye’ (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, Hungary’s application to register the name ‘Nagykörűi ropogós cseresznye’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Hungary’s application to register the name ‘Nagykörűi ropogós cseresznye’ 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 ‘Nagykörűi ropogós cseresznye’ 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 ‘Nagykörűi ropogós cseresznye’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Nagykörűi ropogós cseresznye’ (PGI) 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, 19 August 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 179, 2.5.2022, p. 16.

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

---