alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 50843.

#### Protest 47358-K of J. E. Caldwell & Co. (Philadelphia).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case 'within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries. The protest was sustained to this extent.
No. 53912.

Suit 4617.

#### Stan Newcomb and Barbara Todd *v.*United States.

Abstract 52470 affirmed September 30, 1949. C. A. D. 413.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF MEDAPHIS CORPORATION FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH
31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               162,249
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               143,844
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,105
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,230
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,070
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,424
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12
        

</TABLE>
(Reap. Dec. 10914)

#### John H. Faunce, Phila., Inc., a/c Elof Hansson, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 8526.

*556(Decided March 16, 1965)

*Sharp & Bogan*for the plaintiff.

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

Rao, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned, subject to the approval of the Court:

> 1. That the subject merchandise consists of hardboard exported from Sweden as to which the Secretary of the Treasury issued a finding of dumping, published in 89 TD 197, TD 53567, made pursuant to the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C., 160, et seq.).

> 2. That pursuant to Section 168 of said Antidumping Act, the appraiser reported the purchase price (Sec. 162) and the foreign market value (Sec. 164) as to the merchandise listed on Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof.

> 3. That pursuant to Sections 500 and 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, the appraiser appraised all of the merchandise in the appeals for appraisement enumerated on Schedule A for regular duty purposes.

> 4. That the plaintiff duly filed appeals for reappraisement as to the values referred to in the above paragraphs Nos. 2 and 3.

> 5. That at the times relevant herein the purchase price and the foreign market value under the said Antidumping Act are as specified in the aforesaid Schedule A attached hereto.

> 6. That as to all other items of merchandise not identified on Schedule A, the appraiser’s reports of purchase price and of foreign market value are correct.

> 7. That the appraiser’s findings of value under the provisions of Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, are correct.

> 8. That said appeals are submitted for decision upon this stipulation and said Schedule A.

Upon the agreed facts, I find foreign market value, as defined in section 164 of the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C. § 164), for the merchandise described in schedule A, annexed to this decision and made a part hereof, and the purchase price thereof, within section 162 of said act (19 U.S.C. § 162), to be as indicated in said schedule. As to all other items of merchandise not identified in schedule A, I find the foreign market values and purchase prices to be as reported by the appraiser. In all other respects, the values of all merchandise are as returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 1210** 

RICHARD LEE BAGBY , Plaintiff

– Appellant ,

v.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA , Defendant

– Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern D istrict of Virginia , at Richmond

. Richard L. Williams , Senior District Judge. ( 3:09

- cv - 00547

- RLW )

Submitted : June 17, 2010 Decided: June 24, 2010

Before MOTZ and KING , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un publishe d per curiam opinion

.
Richard Lee Bagby, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Richard Lee Bagby appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing his complaint for failure to pay the statutory fi ling
fee. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. Bagby v. Commonwealth of Virginia , No. 3:09

- cv - 00547

- RLW (E.D. Va. Feb. 2, 2010). We dispense with oral argument bec ause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  Exhibit: 10.6T

SECURITY INTEREST AGREEMENT (#6)                                October 18, 1991

WHEREAS the Trudy Corp of 165 Water Street in Norwalk, Ct. (hereafter "Trudy")
is seeking to pay various operating expenses including payroll and withholding
taxes, and

WHEREAS the Trudy Corp needs additional cash, and has to date been unable to
secure financing from other sources, and

WHEREAS William W. Burnham (hereafter "Burnham") of White Oak Shade Road in New
Canaan, Ct. is willing to assist Trudy Corp by lending Trudy Corp $10,000 (ten
thousand dollars) via his check # 862 for deposit into the Company's account
820-817-414,

NOW THEREFORE, Trudy Corp agrees to provide a security interest to Burnham in
recognition of the value he is providing the Company and the risks inherent
therein. Given that this cash is necessary for the Company to survive, that cash
has great value to Trudy.

Trudy agrees to give Burnham a collateral interest in all Cash or Securities,
all Accounts Receivable both of Trudy and its subsidiary, Soundprints, all
inventory of whatever kind, and all furniture and fixtures. This security
interest shall be limited to the amount referred to above, plus imputed interest
of 12% per annum.

Burnham shall be entitled to perfect his security interest, if and when, Trudy
is unable to repay this debt on its maturity on February 1, 1992. In such
circumstances, Burnham shall have a collateral interest second only to that of
Union Trust (if any), but in any event senior to all trade creditors and to all
other liabilities of the Company unless otherwise stated or stipulated by
legislation.

Both parties agree that there may be partial reductions under this agreement as
goods are imported and paid for by Trudy; the collateral interest shall be
reduced pro rata.

AGREED:  /s/ Peter P. Ogilvie                  ACCEPTED:  /s/ William W. Burnham
         ----------------------                           ----------------------
         Peter P. Ogilvie                                 William W. Burnham
         for Trudy Corp

Dated:   1/24/92
No. 50310.

#### Protests 53029-K, etc., of Bloomingdale Bros., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which.record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries. The protests were sustained to this extent.
106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 26

JOINT RESOLUTION

Providing for the reappointment of Barber B. Congents of the Smithsonian Institution. able, Jr. as a citizen regent of the Board of Re-
106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 26

JOINT RESOLUTION

Providing for the reappointment of Barber B. Conable, Jr.

as a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Stat-
2

•HJ 26 EH

1 utes of the United States (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on

2 the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in

3 the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by

4 reason of the expiration of the term of Barber B. Conable,

5 Jr. of New York on April 11, 1999, is filled by the re6 appointment of the incumbent for a term of six years, ef7 fective April 12, 1999.

Passed the House of Representatives March 23,

1999.

Attest:

Clerk.
No. 63535.

protest 58/25287 (New York).

#### Semca Clock Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protest was dismissed.
Case No. 6,622.

#### HOLLISTER v. LEFERN.

[Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS IN CITADEL BROADCASTING COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED
JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       4,211,115
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               31,691,304
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,126,545
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            37,671,672
<PP&E>                                      48,055,452
<DEPRECIATION>                            (11,371,828)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             372,779,659
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       15,083,802
<BONDS>                                    227,718,180
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      109,155,664
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            40
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,181,049
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               372,779,659
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            62,923,649<F1>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               47,110,472
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            12,962,958
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               597,807
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          10,042,263
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,710,476)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (882,961)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,827,515)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,827,515)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (349.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 (349.31)
<FN>
<F1>Comprised of net revenues (gross revenues net of agency commissions).
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Eric J. Rhett, Plaintiff,
v. U.S. District Court et al., Defendants. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No.

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

# FILED AUG 20 2010 Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia 

# 10 

# 1409

This matter is before the Court on its initial review ofplaintiffs pro se complaint and application for leave to proceed informapauperis. The Court will grant the informapauperis application and dismiss the case because the complaint fails to meet the minimal pleading requirements ofRule 8(a) ofthe Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure. Pro se litigants must comply with the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 656 F. Supp. 237,239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8(a) ofthe Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure requires complaints to contain "(1) a short and plain statement ofthe grounds for the court'sjurisdiction [and] (2) a short and plain statement ofthe claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a); seeAshcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1950 (2009); Ciralsky v. CIA, 355 F.3d 661, 668-71 (D.C. Cir. 2004). The Rule 8 standard ensures that defendants receive fair notice ofthe claim being asserted so that they can prepare a responsive answer and an adequate defense and determine whether the doctrine ofresjudicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).] • t!

Plaintiff, a resident ofRahway, New Jersey, sues New Jersey-based defendants, including the United States District Court in Newark. He also sues the Social Security Administration ("SSA") in New York, New York. 

### See CompI. Caption at 1-2. The complaint consists mostly of disjointed statements that fail to provide any notice ofa claim. To the extent that plaintiffis seekingjudicial review ofan SSA determination, he must bring such an action "in the district court ofthe United States for thejudicial district in which [he] resides," 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), which is the District ofNew Jersey. A separate Order ofdismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: August

# R, 2010

2
**Ernst
              & Young LLP**
            Phone: 
              (317) 681-7000111
              Monument Circle, Suite 2600
            Fax:      
              (317) 681-7216P.O.
              Box 449772
            www.ey.comIndianapolis,
              Indiana 46204-2094








Report
      on
      Management's Assertion on Compliance


with
      the
      Specified Minimum Servicing Standards Set Forth in the


*Uniform
      Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers*




Report
      of
      Independent Accountants




The
      Board
      of Directors


Waterfield
      Mortgage Company, Incorporated




We
      have
      examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying report titled*Report
      of**Management,*that
      Waterfield Mortgage Company, Incorporated and Subsidiaries (the Company)complied
      with the servicing standards identified in Exhibit A to the*Report
      of Management*(the"specified
      minimum servicing standards") as set forth in the Mortgage Bankers Association
      ofAmerica's*Uniform
      Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers*(USAP)
      during the yearended
      December 31, 2005. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance withthose
      specified minimum servicing standards. Our responsibility is to express an
      opinion onmanagement's
      assertions about the Company's compliance based on our
      examination.




Our
      examination was made in accordance with attestation standards established by
      the
      AmericanInstitute
      of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a
      test
      basis,evidence
      about the Company's compliance with the specified minimum servicing standards
      and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
      circumstances. We believethat
      our
      examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does
      notprovide
      a
      legal determination on the Company's compliance with the specified minimumservicing
      standards.




In
      our
      opinion, management's assertion, that the Company complied with the
      aforementionedspecified
      minimum servicing standards during the year ended December 31, 2005, is fairlystated,
      in all material respects.




/s/
              Ernst & Young LLP






March
      21,
      2006






A
      Member
      Practice of Ernst & Young Global
**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 Embrex, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2005 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Randall L. Marcuson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that: 

 

(1) The Reportfully 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. 

 

November 1, 2005
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 10, 2016 

# Order

June 10 , 2016

153 566 ( 36 )

JOANNE JOHNSON, Individually and as Next

Friend of SAMANTHA JOHNSON, a m inor

, Plaintiff s

- Appell ee s

,

v

OUTBACK LODGE & EQUESTRIAN CENTER,

LLC, and OUTBACK LODGE, LLC

, Defendant s

, and

GIRL SCOUTS OF NORTHERN INDIANA

MICHIANA, INC.,

Defendant

- Appell ant

. SC: 15 3 566

COA: 323556

Mecosta CC: 1 2

- 02 0925

- NO

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant

- appellant to extend the time

for filing i t s reply is GRANTED. The reply will be accepted as timely filed if submitted

on or before Ju ne 17 , 2016.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

LYNNE LACEY WHEELER n/k/a LYNNE HEALEY
, Appellant,

v.

CHRISTOPHER WHEELER, JR.
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 3737

[ September 19, 2019 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Jessica Ticktin , Judge; L.T. Case No. 50

- 2006

- DR11991XXXXSB

.

Kerry Loomis of Law Office of Loomis & Loomis, P.A., Boca Raton, for appellant.

Yvette B. Reyes of Reyes Mil ler, P.L., Boca Raton, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

W ARNER
, G ROSS and G ERBER
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
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 Quarterly Report of Dragon International Group
Corp. on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Xiali Gan, Principal
Accounting 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.


May 18, 2007


                                        By: /s/ Xiali Gan
                                        -----------------
                                        Xiali Gan, CFO and
                                        Chief Accounting Officer