alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 54540.

#### Railway Express Company *v.*United States,

protest 153076-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the -court dismissed the protest.
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 1 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 2 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 3 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 4 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 5 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 6 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 7 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 8 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 9 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 10 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 11 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 12 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 13 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 14 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 15 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 16 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 17 of 18
Case 2:02-cv-04074-BWK Document 1 Filed 06/26/2002 Page 18 of 18
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          87,858
<SECURITIES>                                    33,435
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,480
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     41,551
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               211,972
<PP&E>                                          70,940
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 314,357
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,513
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                     288,823
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   314,357
<SALES>                                         59,689
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                60,426
<CGS>                                           40,217
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   75,221
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (3,587)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,208)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (5,678)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,530)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,101)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.25)
        

</TABLE>
---

EXHIBIT 13.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Xiana Mining Inc. (the
Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended January 31, 2016, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Anton
J. Drescher, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §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.

Dated: May 27, 2016

/s/ Anton J.
      DrescherAnton J. DrescherChief Financial Officer


---
----

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | I, George M. Hare, Chief Financial and Principal Accounting Officer of Innotrac Corporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |
| (1)    | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended September 30, 2010 (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.                                                                                  |

|   | Dated: November 15, 2010                               |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                   |   |
|   | /s/ George M. Hare                                     |   |
|   | George M. Hare                                         |   |
|   | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer) |
**Exhibit 12.2**

**Certification ofChief Financial Officer**

I, Leonard Kruimer,certify that:

1.                 I have reviewedthis annual report on Form 20-F of Crucell N.V.;

2.                 Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.                 Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for,the periods presented in this report;

4.                 The company’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the company and have:

a)               Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;

b)              Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and

c)               Disclosed in thisreport any changes in the company’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the period covered by the annual report that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.                 The company’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’sauditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

a)               All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’s abilityto record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)              Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the company’s internal control over financialreporting.

| Date: June 29, 2006 |   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|--------|
| ** **               |   | By:    | /s/ LEONARD KRUIMER |   |
|                     |   | Name:  | Leonard Kruimer |
|                     |   | Title: | *Chief Financial Officer* |
|                          |        |        |  |  |  |

 

----
No. 58875.

protests 215366-K, etc. (Laredo).

#### The Gebhardt Chili Powder Company *v.*United States,

*318Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of salted beef the same in all material respects as that the subject of- Abstract 58200. In view of the stipulation and on authority of the decision cited, it was held that the salted beef imported prior to December 1, 1951, was dutiable upon the basis of the net weight of the beef, as returned by the collector, less 1.5 pounds of salt, liquids, drippings, and other materials per 100 pounds, and that the salted beef imported after December 1, 1951, was dutiable upon the basis of the net weight, as returned by the collector, less 2.4 pounds of salt, liquids, drippings, and other materials per 100 pounds.
##### 



CHANGE IN CONTROL
SEVERANCE AGREEMENT
 This Change in Control Severance Agreement Agreement Effective Date Terence Rugg Executive SGX Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Company
 Recitals
 A. Board
 B. T
 C. Offer Letter
 D.
 Agreement
  1.




---



##### 



1. Term of Agreement.
 2. Definitions of Terms.
 (a) Definition of Cause. Cause
 (i)
 (ii)
 (iii)
 (iv)
 (v)
 (vi)
 (vii)
 (b) Definition of Change in Control. Change in
Control
 (i) Exchange Act
 2.




---



##### 



(ii)
 (iii)
 (iv) Incumbent Board provided,
however,
 (c) Definition of Good Reason. Good Reason
 (i)
 (ii)
 (iii)
 3.




---



##### 



(iv)
 e.g
 3. Acceleration of Vesting Upon a Change in Control.
 4. Compensation Upon Termination.
 (a) Compensation Upon Termination For Any Reason.
 (b) Effective Release Release Exhibit A
 (c) Benefits Upon Termination By the Company Without Cause. 4.
       Severance Period
 (d) Benefits Upon Termination in Connection With a Change in Control.
 (i) Severance.
 (1) Termination without Cause upon or following a Change in Control; Resignation for Good
Reason prior to or following a Change in Control.
 (2) Termination Without Cause Prior to a Change in Control.
 5.




---



##### 



e.g.
 (ii) Acceleration of Vesting of Equity Awards. provided, however, that th provided, however
 (iii) Bonus.
 (iv) Benefits. COBRA
 6.




---



##### 



(v) Indemnification.
 5. Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code and Specified Employees. Revised Payment Schedule e.g. provided, however
 6. Parachute Payments.
 (a) Payment Excise Tax Reduced Amount 7.
       provided, however
 (b)
 (c)
 7. Successors.
 (a) Companys Successors. Company
 8.




---



##### 



(b) Executives Successors.
 8. Miscellaneous Provisions.
 (a) Notice.
 (b) Waiver; Modification.
 (c) Interpretation; Construction.
 (d) Integration. Exhibit A
 (e) Withholding Taxes.
 9.




---



##### 



(f) Choice of Law.
 (g) Severability.
 (h) At-Will Employment.
  10.




---



##### 



In Witness Whereof,
 /s/ Terence RuggTerence RuggSGX Pharmaceuticals, Inc.By
    
    /s/ Jean-Francois FormelaTitle
    
    Director
 1.




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A
 RELEASE AND WAIVER OF CLAIMS
 [To be signed and delivered following termination]
 Agreement Terence Rugg SGX Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Company Release and Waiver
 ADEA
 A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not
know or suspect to exist in [his/her] favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by
him must have materially affected [his/her] settlement with the debtor.




---



##### 



.
 Date:Terence Rugg
BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, SEVENTH DISTRICT, AT AMARILLO

No. 07-14-00048-CV

In the Matter of R.A.J., a Child

(No. 10,253-J#1 IN COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO 1 OF POTTER COUNTY)

Type of Fee Charges Paid By

Motion fee

Motion fee

Reporter's record

Motion fee

Statewide efiling fee

Filing

Indigent

Supreme Court chapter 51 fee

$15.00

$10.00

$1,050.00

$10.00

$20.00

$100.00

$25.00

$50.00

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

UNKNOWN

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

INDIGENT

John C Bennett

John C Bennett

Potter County

John C Bennett

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Balance of costs owing to the Seventh Court of Appeals, Amarillo, Texas: $0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per

the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, VIVIAN LONG, CLERK OF THE SEVENTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE

STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of

the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS,

showing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears

of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand

and the Seal of the COURT OF APPEALS for the

Seventh District of Texas on March 24, 2015.

Vivian Long

VIVIAN LONG, CLERK

FILE COPY
BEFORE THE FlRST DIVISION,

November 29, 1956

No. 60384.

protest 190982-K/3980 (Chicago).

#### American Express Company *v.*United States,

*429Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of pendants the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Brier Manufacturing Co.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 68, C. A. D. 465), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

FREDERICK T. RAY, III : CIVIL ACTION

 :

v. :

 : 

SGT. THOMAS A. MADONNA, et al. : NO. 04-cv-00805-JF

FREDERICK T. RAY, III : CIVIL ACTION

 :

v. :

 : 

MAJOR WALTER REED, et al. : NO. 04-cv-00810-JF

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Fullam, Sr. J. July 17, 2008

By Order entered September 6, 2007, I granted plaintiff

a further period of 60 days within which to respond to

defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and listed four issues

which plaintiff should address, if he wished to respond to the

motion. Instead of responding to the motion for summary

judgment, however, plaintiff filed a document entitled “Motion

for Clarification,” which suggests that my Order seemed to be

inconsistent with the views of the Court of Appeals, when it

remanded the case in order to afford plaintiff an opportunity to

respond to the defense motions. 

The Motion for Clarification will be denied, inasmuch

as this Court’s Order of September 6, 2007 is self-explanatory

and requires no further clarification. Plaintiff will be

afforded a further period of 20 days in which to respond to the

Case 2:04-cv-00805-JF Document 24 Filed 07/17/08 Page 1 of 4
2

defense motions, in accordance with my September 6, 2007 Order. 

Failure to do so will result in dismissal of these actions.

An Order follows.

Case 2:04-cv-00805-JF Document 24 Filed 07/17/08 Page 2 of 4
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

FREDERICK T. RAY, III : CIVIL ACTION

 :

v. :

 : 

SGT. THOMAS A. MADONNA, et al. : NO. 04-cv-00805-JF

FREDERICK T. RAY, III : CIVIL ACTION

 :

v. :

 : 

MAJOR WALTER REED, et al. : NO. 04-cv-00810-JF

ORDER

AND NOW, this 17 day of July 2008, IT IS ORDERED: th

1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Clarification of this

Court’s Order of September 6, 2007 is DENIED.

2. Plaintiff is afforded a further period of 20

days in which to respond to the pending motions for summary

judgment.

3. Unless plaintiff files such response, these

actions will be dismissed with prejudice.

4. Plaintiff’s motion to compel is GRANTED in 

part and DENIED in part. Unless they have already done so, 

the defendants shall, within 10 days, provide plaintiff with

incident reports concerning the events referred to in plaintiff’s

complaint. In all other respects, the motion is DENIED.

Case 2:04-cv-00805-JF Document 24 Filed 07/17/08 Page 3 of 4
2

5. Plaintiff’s “Motion to Continue” is GRANTED.

Trial will not be scheduled until this Court rules on the 

pending motions for summary judgment.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ John P. Fullam 

John P. Fullam, Sr. J.

Case 2:04-cv-00805-JF Document 24 Filed 07/17/08 Page 4 of 4
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

THOMAS RICHARD ROSS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 415 WAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 26th day of May, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 438 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 438

Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the importance of locating a 
             national immigration museum in El Paso, Texas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 28, 2000

  Mr. Reyes submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the importance of locating a 
             national immigration museum in El Paso, Texas.

Whereas more than 20 million people currently living in the United States trace 
        their roots to Mexico and Mexican Americans represent one of the fastest 
        growing population groups in this country;
Whereas people of Mexican descent have made significant contributions in all 
        areas of American life;
Whereas these people and their ancestors have a rich history that must be 
        preserved and told for the benefit of current and future generations of 
        Americans;
Whereas the histories of individuals and families, from many backgrounds, who 
        faced hardship and adversity to move north in search of better lives for 
        themselves and their descendants, should be documented and incorporated 
        in the larger history of the United States;
Whereas the histories of these courageous people represent the strong 
        relationship between the people of the United States and the people of 
        Mexico;
Whereas no museum currently exists that is dedicated to the history of Mexican 
        immigration to the United States or to the history of Mexican Americans;
Whereas historically El Paso, Texas was the main port of entry for people 
        migrating from Mexico into the United States;
Whereas El Paso and its sister city, Ciudad Juarez, Mexico together form the 
        largest international border city; and
Whereas the University of Texas at El Paso, the major Mexican-American majority 
        university in the United States, is coordinating a national effort to 
        create in El Paso a major national museum dedicated to preserving the 
        history of people who over five centuries have moved northward into the 
        present-day United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) supports the creation in El Paso, Texas of the Paso al 
        Norte Immigration History Museum and;
            (2) urges its designation as the national museum of 
        immigration from Mexico to the United States.
                                 <all>
```
No. 61239.

protests 275657-K, etc. (New York).

#### Hudson Art Importing Co., Inc., 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) of the tariff act, and the items 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), for “Works of art * * * statuary, sculptures, or copies, replicas, or reproductions thereof, valued at not less than $2.50.”