alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 60890.

#### Gramercy Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 266541-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issues are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *John P. Herber & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 193, C. D. 1519), the protests were dismissed, and the matters were remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)).
<PAGE>   1


                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.63



                                             July 1, 1998



Mr. Eric G. Walters
165 Cambridge Turnpike
Concord, MA   01742


                         Re:  Amendment of Employment Agreement
                              ---------------------------------

Dear Eric,

This letter agreement serves to further amend the employment agreement dated as
of June 1, 1991, by and between you and PolyMedica Industries, Inc. (the
"Company"), as amended by certain letter agreements dated as of December 5,
1991; March 18, 1993; March 31, 1994; April 11, 1995; April 3, 1996; and July 1,
1997 (together, the "Employment Agreement").

         TERM OF EMPLOYMENT. The Employment Period, as defined in Section 2 of
         the Employment Agreement, is extended to May 31, 2000.

If the foregoing is acceptable to you, please indicate your agreement by signing
a copy of this letter agreement and returning it to the undersigned.



                                          Very truly yours,


                                          /s/ Steven J. Lee
                                          ------------------------------------
                                          Steven J. Lee
                                          Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO:



/s/ Eric G. Walters
------------------------------
Eric G. Walters
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 75 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                             H. J. RES. 75

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2000, and 
                          for other purposes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 75

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2000, and 
                          for other purposes.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Public Law 106-62 is 
further amended by striking ``November 5, 1999'' in section 106(c) and 
inserting ``November 10, 1999''. Public Law 106-46 is amended by 
striking ``November 5, 1999'' and inserting ``November 10, 1999''.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 4, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
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
December 31, 2007 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 Officer |  |  |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | 

Date:
January 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
December 31, 2007 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 Officer |  |  |  | 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | 

Date:
January 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
No. 53395.

protests 110058-K, etc. (St. Louis).

#### Denebeim Distilling Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          11,553
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,742
<ALLOWANCES>                                       383
<INVENTORY>                                      2,906
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,971
<PP&E>                                           7,056
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,549
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  52,991
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,001
<BONDS>                                          2,244
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           12,798
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        80,248
<OTHER-SE>                                    (69,597)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    52,991
<SALES>                                         22,590
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                22,590
<CGS>                                           12,482
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,482
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                30,394
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (501)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (19,784)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (21,492)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.29)


</TABLE>
(Reap. Dec. 10637)

#### United China & Glass Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 4849.

(Decided December 17, 1963)

*Stein & Shostalc*for the plaintiff.

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

Wilson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto that the merchandise consists of cutlery sets, exported from Japan and that the merchandise, the facts and the law are similar in all material respects to the merchandise, the facts and the law in *United, China é Glass Co,*v. *United States,*49 Oust. Ot. 407, Reap. Dec. 10346, Advance Treasury Decisions, Vol. 97, No. 41, page 51.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the record in Reap. Dec. 10346 be incorporated with the record in this case.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, as to the merchandise covered by the appeal for reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Oases, that, on the dates of exportation thereof to the United States, the market value or the price at which such or similar merchandise *492(cutlery sets) was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, were the invoice unit values net, packed.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that as to any of the merchandise covered by the appeal for reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Oases which is included in the list of articles designated by the Secretary of the Treasury in T.D. 54521, as provided for in Section 6(a) of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, Public Law 927, 84th Congress, which is subject to appraisement under See. 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, that there was no higher foreign values for such or similar merchandise on the dates of exportation involved herein.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeal for reap-praisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Cases may be deemed submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

Upon the agreed facts, I find and hold export value, as that value is defined in section 402a (d) of the Tariff Act of 1980, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise herein involved, and that such values were the invoice unit values, net, packed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Exhibit 99.3 - Annual Statement of Compliance for the year
	       ended December 31, 2005

   [Countrywide
						 HOME LOANS logo]

						400 Countrywide Way
		                 	Simi Valley, California 93065-6298


March 10, 2006





US BANK
209 LASALLE ST 3 FL
CHICAGO, IL 60604
Attn: MIKE ORTIZ


			OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE


I, Joseph Candelario, hereby certify that I am the First Vice President, Loan
Administration of Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., fka Countrywide Funding
Corporation. I further certify, with respect to the Servicing Agreements for
Countrywide Mortgage Obligations, Inc., the following:

I have reviewed the activities and performance of the Servicer during the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2005 under the Agreements and, to the best of my
knowledge, based on my review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its duties,
responsibilities or obligations under the Agreements throughout the fiscal year.




/s/ Joseph Candelario			March 10, 2006
Joseph Candelario			Date
First Vice President
Compliance Officer
Loan Administration




re: Investor Numbers: 7003769, 7004068, 7005929, 7005930, 7005300, 7005301,
7005187, 7005188, 7005757, 7005758, 7005859, 7005860, 7005482, 7005483,
7006138, 7006139, 7006140, 7006141, 7008207 See Deal Name listing on following
page.

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

						[Countrywide
						 HOME LOANS logo]

						400 Countrywide Way
		                 	Simi Valley, California 93065-6298

US BANK Deal Name Listing:

7003769 - Harborview 2003-3
7004068 - HVMLT 2004-2
7008102 -  (FFMLT TRUST 2005-FF7)
	- Harborview 2005-1
	- Harborview 2005-2
	- Harborview 2005-3
	- Harborview 2005-8
	- Harborview 2005-10
	- Harborview 2005-12
	- Harborview 2005-13
	- Harborview 2005-16
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER OF TUESDAY MORNING CORPORATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. §1350

 

I, Kathleen Mason, the Chief Executive Officer of Tuesday MorningCorporation, hereby certify that:

 

1.                                       Thequarterly report on Form 10-Q of Tuesday Morning Corporation for theperiod ended June 30, 2005 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: August 1, 2005 | By:    | /s/ Kathleen Mason                       |   |
|---------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|--------|
|                      |   | Kathleen Mason   Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 12

- 00098

- CR

AMBER IONE ARNOLD , Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 66th District Court Hill County, Texas Trial Court No. 36,793

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Amber Ione Arnold’s counsel has filed a motion to dismiss this
appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a).
Rule 42.2(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure states:
At any time before the appellate court’s decision, the appellate court may dismi ss the appeal upon the appellant’s motion. The appellant and his or her attorney must sign the written motion to dismiss and file it in duplicate with the appellate clerk, who must immediately send the duplicate copy to the trial court clerk.Arnold v. State Page 2

Id. We hav e not issued a decision in this appeal. The motion is signed by Arnold’s
attorney, and although Arnold did not sign the motion itself, she did sign an affidavit in
which she swore to having read the motion and acknowledged that the facts contained

in the motion are true and correct. Arnold’s trial counsel has also attached to the
motion to dismiss the transcript of a hearing held by the trial court on January 8, 2013 in
which Arnold states that she wishes to dismiss her appeal. The motion, affidavit, and
statement on the record are a sufficient basis on which to dismiss the appeal. See

Hendrix v. State , 86 S.W.3d 762, 763

- 64 (Tex. App.

— Waco 2002, no pet.); White v. State
, 993 S.W.2d 381, 382 (Tex. App

— Waco 1999, no pet.).
The motion to dismiss is grante d, and the appeal is dismissed. Arnold’s pending
motion for abatement of this appeal is dismissed as moot.

REX D. DAVIS Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis , and Justice Scoggins Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed February 7, 2013 Do not p ublish [C R25]
August 7, 1947

No. 51866.

Suit *4538.*

#### Garrard *Sales Corp.*v. *United States.*

C. D. 950 reversed June 17, 1947. C A. D. 369.
August 31, 2016

Mr. Kevin Colburn Terrafugia, Inc.
23 Rainin Road Woburn, MA 01801

Re: FAA-2015-1382

Dear Mr. Colburn:

This letter is to provide notification that we have reviewed your petition for exemption, and
have determined that we will con tinue to process your petition.

As referenced in the June 22, 2016, letter posted to your docket at www.regulations.gov , we are reviewing pending Section 333 petitions to determine if the recently-issued regulation, Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 107 ( www.faa.gov/uas ) will satisfy your request. We have determined that your request requires further regulatory relief (T ier 3), and we will continue working on your petition for exemption.

We have found that your petition, if granted, would set a precedent. Therefore, we will publish a summary of your petition in the Federa l Register for public comments, if we have not done so already.

We will advise you of the agency’s final deci sion on your petition as s oon as possible. If you have any questions regarding your petition, please contact me at 333exemptions@faa.gov

.

Sincerely,
/s/
Brenda Robeson Program Analyst
##### 




    
    The Relocation Benefits are:
 1.
    
    Reimbursement of commissions on the sale of your current home in
California, up to a maximum of 5% of the purchase price. We will also reimburse
you for up to a maximum of $12,000 for reasonable and customary closing costs on
the sale of your home in California.2.
    
    Reimbursement of reasonable and customary closing costs incurred on
the purchase of a home in New York not to exceed $70,000.
  
    
    Normal attorneys fees/escrow fees
    
    Appraisal fee for mortgage
    
    Mansion Taxes or similar assessments
    
    Credit report fee
    
    Recording and transfer fees
    
    Title insurance
    
    Notary fee
    
    Survey fee
    
    Inspections which are required by the lender
 3.
    
    Reimbursement of reasonable temporary housing expenses in the Area
through December 31, 2007 while you are living in temporary accommodations.




---



##### 



4.
    
    The reasonable costs of the relocation of normal household goods,
furniture and two vehicles from your home in California to the Area will be paid
for by the Company.5.
    
    To assist you in the transition and recognizing that you are
currently provided with automobile and associated expenses, the Company will
provide you with an annual allowance over a three year period. For 2006 you will
receive a lump sum of $20,000 payable on September 15, 2006. You will receive
$15,000 for 2007 and $10,000 for 2008, payable on the first regular payroll cycle
of each year.6.
    
    To assist you in covering the higher property taxes in New York, the
Company will reimburse you up to $14,000 per year for the difference
between the amounts of property tax that you would have paid on your home in
California had you continued living there and the amount that you are required to
pay on your new home in the Area for each of 2006, 2007 and 2008. Such payments
will be made within 30 days of your submitting your property tax bill for the
applicable year to the Company.7.
    
    The Company will reimburse you up to $13,000 for the loss of tuition
already paid by you for private schooling in California for the academic school
year 2006-2007 which is not refundable.
    /s/
Ana Herrera
 
 I acknowledge and accept the terms of this letter agreement as stated:
 Signature:
    
    /s/ Raj SundaramName:
    
    Raj Sundaram      Date: 10/26/06
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 June 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)

August 9, 2006



/s/ Gregory S. Fredrick

Chief Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)

August 9, 2006









1
The 

### ~ialague'an 

### ~Su&&abfe Pi&g Level was 

### a 

### n&id&ehal.&err sass-se agencies. &&@ant8 

### in the Ddcgue &I 

### Sustainable

### Fnmme of 

## ~a~odng of packaging 

### atth~~~unid~d he1 were taskedwith produ&ng 

### a qff thai discusses multiple 

### swaegies fir l3mmh.g 

### mxmkipd 

### recyclbg systmm 

### fow+bg ofi-cb~slwrm packaging. While 

### %h&m$urt is oresult 

### of= EPA&n=rref di&guq?&e 

### geicirt is a 

### work product cf&e-tffalogue 

### pmticipmb~ andmt 

### sfPA, 13PA

### bvites ybuTZb review

. - 

### and 

### cemmr:nt OH

### the

### rep~rk.
. ' J" ; . -.

. 

## -- , . * a- , 

## .x : . - 8 

### Comments 

### on 

### them&k'aBb&m 

# &-mP* 

# < -: available 

### at.~~gai~ov~aste/~&se~e/~shII $?PA 

### will 

### review 

### zd cb-mments 

### received 

### and cansitkc them 

### in any 

### htmgsti-aas, but 

### dtw9at plain b formaflyrespond to comments

### on the 

### fW rep - 

### !. hB < 1. 1. This 

### document 

### w-3-€ 

### be ogemr 

### tbr gmbBc2w-nt 

### br 60 

### day8 podbig oil RegulaIiuhs.gc&. Sum 

### your 

### c~&.x~~&&w&-B~ ERsbE-ID 

### FXa ~~f~@~~~-20k:%?i~^9~12, by one of the following 

### m&ods: vmw~e-d&tjm.~ 

### Mow&e: 

### -tr~%~Pm~&ct~ &

### abrnitting
. 4&Il~rnb, + 

### - .--- - a .. ":-. ', ... 

### . , - -.- . - *:1 '2
, f':- '- -3- . , - 2
No. 53402.

protests 147101-K and 147092-K (New York).

#### J. & J. Distributing Co. and McKesson & Robbins *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
1

The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable

Franklin L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 10-2679

___________

Lamont Gentry Falls, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Dwight L. Fondren, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: March 7, 2011

Filed: March 8, 2011

___________

Before MELLOY, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate Lamont Gentry Falls appeals from the district court’s1

 denial of

his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, in which he challenged disciplinary proceedings that

ultimately resulted in, among other things, a loss of good conduct time. Upon careful

de novo review, see Mitchell v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 538 F.3d 948, 951 (8th Cir.

2008) (per curiam), we agree with the district court that Falls was adequately afforded

due process in the disciplinary proceedings, and we agree with the conclusion that the
2

We decline to consider Falls’s newly raised claim regarding evidence allegedly

withheld from him. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004) (claims not

presented in district court may not be advanced for first time on appeal).

-2-

disciplinary decision was supported by the evidence. See, e.g., Superintendent v. Hill,

472 U.S. 445, 455-56 (1985) (requirements of due process are satisfied if “some

evidence” supports disciplinary decision to revoke good time credits).2

 

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
CHAPTER 2 

Issue Category: Under What Conditions 

Will Federal Standards be Either Not 

Finalized or Withdrawn 

Page 4446 

Response to Public Comments 

Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's 

Lakes and Flowing Waters 

November 14, 2010 

40 CFR Part 131 

Docket #: EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596 

This document is part of a larger document 
Chapter 2 - Comment Documents Under What Conditions Will Federal Standards Be Either Not Finalized or Withdrawn? 

IV - UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS WILL FEDERAL STANDARDS BE 

EITHER NOT FINALIZED OR WITHDRAWN? 

No Comments are Applicable to this Issue Category, and Thus No Response is Necessary. 

11/19/2010 02:48 PM EST 2-4446