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

August 27, 1957

No. 61181.

protests 145129-K, etc. (New York).

#### Abels Wasserberg & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of figures similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, prior to May 28, 1950, were held dutiable at 20 percent under paragraph 1547 (a), as “Works of art * * * statuary, sculptures, or copies, replicas, or reproductions thereof, valued at not less than $2.50,” and those entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on and after May 28, 1950, were held dutiable at 10 percent under said paragraph, as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 52373), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T. D. 52476).
EXHIBIT 13.2 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 Shell Company Report of China Linen Textile Industry, Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 20-F/A for the period ended July 9, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Huang Xianfang, 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: (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 result of operations of the Company.  /s/ Huang XiaofangHuang Xiaofang, Chief Financial Officer July 14, 2009
EXHIBIT
32.1







CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with Amendment No. 1 on
Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report of BigString Corporation (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the “Report”), I, Darin M.
Myman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:




(1)
            the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of §13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. §78m or 78o(d),
      and,




(2)
            the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.







Dated:
      April 30, 2009
            /s/
      Darin M. MymanDarin
      M. MymanPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer
<page>

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 Quarterly Report of Dragon International Group Corp.
on Form  10-QSB  for the  period  ending  September  30,  2005 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof,  I, David Wu,  Chief
Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1. The Report 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 result of operations of the Company.


November 23, 2005


                                                 By:/s/ David Wu
                                  David Wu, CEO
Exhibit 32a

Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18of the United States Code

I, Thomas M. OFlynn, Chief Executive Officer of PSE&G Transition Funding II LLC, to the best of my knowledge, certify that (i) the Annual Report of PSE&G Transition Funding II LLC on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2007 (the "Periodic Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PSE&G Transition Funding II LLC.

/s/
THOMASM. OFLYNNThomas M. OFlynnChief Executive OfficerMarch 14, 2008


---
National Geospatial Advisory Committee

NGAC Resolution

National Address Database

DECISION: The National Geospatial Advisory Committee adopted the following 

resolution on April 4, 2018:

“The National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) is encouraged by the progress the Federal 

Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) community is making in developing the National Address 

Database (NAD). The NGAC commends the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Department of 

Transportation for their leadership of this important initiative. The NGAC has expressed its support 

for the development of the NAD for many years, through an initial paper, “The Need for a National 

Address Database” (2012), through a previous NGAC resolution (2013), and through development 

of a set of use cases (2014). The NGAC believes that the NAD is consistent with the Data, 

Accountability, and Transparency component of the President’s Management Agenda; that it 

reflects a productive partnership of Tribal, Federal, State, and local governments; and that it will 

be a model use of the FGDC’s Geospatial Platform. The NGAC strongly encourages FGDC 

agencies to devote appropriate support and resources to create a National Address Database 

Program that will ensure the long-term institutionalization of the NAD as a National Geospatial 

Data Asset.”
No. 60702.

#### J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 280040-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with rule 5 (b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
Before the First Division,

October 15, 1952

No. 56893.

#### Robert & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 187354-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of ammonium sulphoiatoclate (ichtamol N. F.) the same in all material respects as the commodity passed upon in *United States*v. *Kachurin Drug Company*(39 C. C. P. A. 36, C. A. D. 459), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Record of Discussion 

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD 

With whom outside the FAA has this action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, 

manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, GAMA, etc)? 

ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE TOPICS DISCUSSED 

Boeing SB review August 6-8,2013 Concur. 

A4A Robert Ireland January 13,2014 No response. 

Other/ Additional Information: 

9 
Signature Section 

Signature indicates concurrence with this action. 

Originating Office TrackiLJ~: 

~df J,n. I J,/l't 

ASE fiLu.... ;11{ Date 

COS Focal (optional) Date 

c::=;-=2 

Branch Manager \ '=-J '----

Date 

-{(Jl 

AEG Representative (except for appliance.\) Date 

MIDO/ , 0/MIO Representative* D'te 

*Signature required [fa QC problem is involved. 

EIR NUMBER (MIDO/CMO/MIO use only) 

' J ' 

ACO/Staff Office MaDij:::---- Date ' I 

~iL 

fZ . t~4 {)<:. s 

10
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 TEX. R. APP. 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 

dismiss 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 have 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 granted, 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 publish

[CR25]
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 9:46 AM

To: 'eric@integratower.com'

Cc: '333exemptions@faa.gov'

Subject: Petition for Exemption: Integra Tower, LLC (FAA-2015-0327)

May 28, 2015 

Dear Mr. DeVersa: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2015-0327). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your 

petition. 

 Describe the aircraft make, model, and type (i.e. - fixed-wing, rotorcraft, lighter-than-air) for the 

proposed UAS operation. The description should include the maximum weight (including 

payload). This information can be located in the aircraft manual. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit 

any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to 

333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information 

described above by June 11, 2015. If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without 

notifying you further. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels 

Program Analyst 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
www.316-a.com

Cooling 400,000 gpm of plant 
www.316-a.com

Cooling 600,000 gpm of plant 
Recycling Discharge Wa

www.316-b.com
Recycling Discharge W

www.316-b.com
Cooling 1,000,000 gpm of discha
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 10.15

                         AMENDMENT TO OPTION AGREEMENT

         Reference is made to the Amended and Restated Option Agreement, dated
as of May 15, 1998 (the "Option Agreement"), between URS W. STAMPFLI (the
"Optionee") and CONCORD CAMERA CORP. ("Concord"), as the same was amended and
restated as of May 15, 1998 in connection with that certain letter agreement
dated September 19, 2002, pursuant to which Option Agreement the Optionee has an
option (the "Option") to purchase 60,000 shares (adjusted to reflect the
two-for-one split of Concord's common stock effected April 14, 2000 and all
exercises made before July 31, 2001 under the original option agreement dated as
of May 15, 1998) of Concord's no par common stock (the "Common Stock").

         FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the Option Agreement is hereby amended, effective
as of February 11, 2003, to permit the Optionee to elect to defer the delivery
of the Common Stock he would acquire pursuant to an exercise of the Option. Any
such deferral will be subject to the terms and conditions of Concord's Deferred
Delivery Plan (the "Plan"), a copy of which has been provided separately, and,
when purchasing Option Shares pursuant to the Plan, the payment provisions of
the Plan will apply instead of the provisions in Section 8 of the Option
Agreement regarding methods for payment of the Purchase Price.

         Unless otherwise provided herein, all capitalized terms shall have the
meaning assigned to such terms in the Option Agreement.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Amendment as of
the date first above written.

                                          CONCORD CAMERA CORP.


                                          By:    /s/  Richard M. Finkbeiner
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Richard M. Finkbeiner
                                               Senior Vice President and
                                               Chief Financial Officer


                                          OPTIONEE:


                                          /s/ Urs. W. Stampfli
                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Urs W. Stampfli
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. LEONEL AVILA-PEREZ, Defendant - Appellant. No. 13-50519 D.C. No. 2:13-cr-00359-SVW-1 MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Stephen Wilson, District Judge, Presiding Submitted November 20, 2014 ** Pasadena, California Before: SCHROEDER and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges, and ZOUHARY, *** District Judge. 

# FILED
DEC 02 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes th is case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Jack Zouhary, United States District Judge, Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.Defendant-Appellant Leonel Avila-Perez (“Avila-Perez”) appeals the district court’s rejection of his Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C) sentence bargain. He also appeals his 36-month sentence for illegal reentry in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and now affirm. 1. Because the district court provide d specific reasons, rooted in the circumstances of this case, for rejecti ng the sentence bargain, it did not abuse its discretion. See In re Morgan , 506 F.3d 705, 711–12 (9th Cir. 2007). The district court did not plainly err in its statements made pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(5)(B), and Avila -Perez fails to show that any e rror under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(5)(C) affected his substantial rights. See United States v. Borowy , 595 F.3d 1045, 1049–50 (9th Cir. 2010). 2. Avila-Perez waived his fact-bound objection to the district court’s application of U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(d), to which he agreed during sentencing. See United States v. Hernandez-Ramirez , 254 F.3d 841, 845 (9th Cir. 2001). The district court sufficiently explained the below-Gu idelines-range sentence it imposed. See United States v. Sandoval-Orellana , 714 F.3d 1174, 1180–81 (9th Cir. 2013). Assuming plain error, Avila-Perez fails to show the Govern ment’s silence at sentencing affected his substantial rights. See United States v. Waknine , 543 F.3d 546, 552–53 (9th Cir. 2008). AFFIRMED. 2
No. 66655.

#### J. J. Sales Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 61/720 (New York).

*401Opinion by

Oliver, O.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of polystyrene novelties similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 64402, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 32.1



WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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



The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Global Imaging Systems, Inc. (the
Company), each hereby certifies that, to his knowledge on the date hereof:



| | (a) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|               |  |                                                            
|-------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|August 6, 2004 |  | /s/ Thomas S. Johnson                                      
|Date           |  | Thomas S. Johnson,                                         
|               |  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer                       
|               | 
|August 6, 2004 |  | /s/ Raymond Schilling                                      
|Date           |  | Raymond Schilling,                                         
|               |  | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer andTreasurer



The foregoing certification is being
furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document. This certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (Exchange Act) or otherwise subject to liability under that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act except to the extent
this Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.



A signed original of this statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Global Imaging Systems, Inc. and will be retained by Global Imaging Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Before the Second Division,

July 12, 1948

No. 52453.

protests 879675-G and 928552-G (New York).

#### John Zimmermann Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise consist of racello hats or hat bodies similar in all material respects to those the classification' of which was involved in Abstract 47291. Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact and following the cited authority the claim at 25 percent under paragraph 1504 (b) (1) was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 35 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 35

Disapproving the certification of the President under section 490(b) of 
  the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 regarding foreign assistance for 
                    Mexico during fiscal year 1999.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 1999

  Mr. Bachus (for himself, Mr. Shaw, Mr. Brown of Ohio, Mr. Burton of 
   Indiana, Mr. English, Mr. Traficant, Mrs. Myrick, Mr. Istook, Mr. 
     Chabot, Mr. Rush, Mr. Barr of Georgia, Mrs. Northup, and Mr. 
   Hostettler) introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
          referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Disapproving the certification of the President under section 490(b) of 
  the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 regarding foreign assistance for 
                    Mexico during fiscal year 1999.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,   

SECTION 1. DISAPPROVAL OF DETERMINATION OF PRESIDENT REGARDING MEXICO.

    Pursuant to subsection (d) of section 490 of the Foreign Assistance 
Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2291j), Congress disapproves the determination 
of the President with respect to Mexico for fiscal year 1999 that is 
contained in the certification (transmittal no. 99-15) submitted to 
Congress by the President under subsection (b) of that section on 
February 26, 1999.

SEC. 2. WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT TO WITHHOLD ASSISTANCE FOR MEXICO.

    (a) Waiver.--Notwithstanding subsections (e) and (f) of section 490 
of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, the requirement to withhold 
United States assistance and to vote against multilateral development 
bank assistance contained in such subsection (e) shall not apply with 
respect to Mexico until March 1, 2000, if at any time after the date of 
the enactment of this joint resolution, the President submits to 
Congress a determination and certification described in subsection (b) 
of this section.
    (b) Determination and Certification.--A determination and 
certification described in this subsection is a determination and 
certification consistent with section 490(b)(1)(B) of the Foreign 
Assistance Act of 1961 that the vital national interests of the United 
States require that the assistance withheld pursuant to section 
490(e)(1) of such Act be provided for Mexico and that the United States 
not vote against multilateral development bank assistance for Mexico 
pursuant to section 490(e)(2) of such Act.
                                 <all>
```
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 Annual Report of
SRKP 5, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Anthony C. Pintsopoulos, 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/
      Anthony C. PintsopoulosAnthony
      C. Pintsopoulos
                Principal
      Financial OfficerFebruary
      18, 2009