alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

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 amended quarterly report of Bayou City Exploration, Inc.,
formerly Blue Ridge Energy, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period
ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Norman G. Haisler, 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:


      (1)   The amended 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 amended report fairly presents, in
            all material respects, the financial condition and results of
            operations of the Company.

                                          /s/ Norman G. Haisler
                                          -----------------------------
                                          Norman G. Haisler
                                          Senior Vice President-Finance
                                          and Chief Financial Officer


August 8, 2005
EXHIBIT 32.2

In connection with the periodic report of Nara Bancorp, Inc (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), I, Philip E. Guldeman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Dated: February 18, 2011



/S/    PHILIP E.
GULDEMANChief Financial Officer
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 the Annual Report on Form 20-F of IRSA
Propiedades Comerciales S.A. (the “Company”) for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2018 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), Matias
Gaivironsky, as Chief Financial Officer of the company, hereby
certifies, 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 and 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.





IRSA Propiedades Comerciales S.A.October
22, 2018.
By:
/s/ Matias
GaivironskyMatias
GaivironskyChief
Financial Officer





This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except as to the
extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed
by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Case No. 7,796.

#### KING v. GORSLINE et al.

[4 Cranch, C. C. 150.] *1*

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

May Term, 1831.

Garnishment — Drafts Drawn before Attachment— Priority of Payment.

Drafts drawn by the defendant upon his debt- or before attachment are entitled to priority of payment out of the fund in the hands of the garnishee, although the garnishee has no notice of such drafts until after attachment served.

[Cited in Miller v. Hubbard, Case No. 9,574.]

[Richard] Gorsline owed [Thomas] King, and the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company owed Gorsline. King issued his attachment, which was served on the canal company on the 20th of August, 1S30. The garnishee pleaded nulla bona, and it appeared in evidence that before the issuing of the attachment Gorsline had drawn upon the canal company, in favor of the Farmers’ and Mechanics’ Bank, for sundry sums of money advanced to him by them on the faith of those drafts, but the canal company had no notice of them until the day after the service of the attachment If they were entitled to priority, they exhausted the whole fund.

Mr. C. Cox, for the Farmers’ & Mechanics’ Bank,

cited 1 Chit Bills, 1; Yeates v. Groves, 1 Ves. Jr. 280; Brooks v. Rogers, 1 H. Bl. 640; Wakefield v. Martin, 3 Mass. 558; Bac. Abr. 260, “Custom of London”; Stevenson v. Pemberton, 1 Dali. [1 ü. S.] 3; Wood v. Roach, 2 Dali. [2 L\ S.] 180; Welch v. Mande-ville [Case No. 17,371], in this court; Serg. Attaehm. 80, 81.

Mr. Wallaeh, for plaintiff,

contended that a bill drawn is not an assignment of the fund, against attaching creditors, until notice to the drawee. Mandeville v. Welch, 5 Wheat. [18 ü. S.] 277; Steuart v. West, 1 Har. & J. 537.

1

 [Reported by Hon. William Granch, Chief Judge.]

THE COURT

(nem. con.) was of opinion that the drafts of the defendant upon the garnishees were an equitable assignment of so much of the funds of the debtor in their hands, and those drafts having exhausted the whole fund, the court quashed the attachments. The question submitted to the court was whether the F. and M. Bank had a priority, by reason of the drafts of Gorsline, received by the bank, but not notified to the canal company, the drawees, until after the attachments served.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

KATHLEEN STARMAN and

DUANE STARMAN

:

:

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4261

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04261-JP Document 6 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:04-cv-04264-RB Document 11 Filed 06/29/05 Page 1 of 1
# Euroopa Liidu C 384/2011

| | ISSN 1977-0898
  doi:10.3000/19770898.C_2011.384.est |
| --- | --- |
| Euroopa Liidu
  Teataja | C 384 |
| | |
| Eestikeelne väljaanne | Teave ja teatised | 54. köide31. detsember 2011 |

ISSN 1977-0898

doi:10.3000/19770898.C_2011.384.est

Euroopa Liidu

Teataja

C 384

Eestikeelne väljaanne

Teave ja teatised

54. köide31. detsember 2011

---

| Teatis nr | Sisukord | Lehekülg |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Teave |
| | TEAVE EUROOPA LIIDU INSTITUTSIOONIDELT, ORGANITELT JA ASUTUSTELT |
| | Euroopa Komisjon |
| 2011/C 384/01 | Euro vahetuskurss | 1 |

Teatis nr

Sisukord

Lehekülg

IV   Teave

TEAVE EUROOPA LIIDU INSTITUTSIOONIDELT, ORGANITELT JA ASUTUSTELT

Euroopa Komisjon

2011/C 384/01

Euro vahetuskurss

1

| ET | |
| --- | --- |

ET

---

IV Teave

TEAVE EUROOPA LIIDU INSTITUTSIOONIDELT, ORGANITELT JA ASUTUSTELT

Euroopa Komisjon

| 31.12.2011 | ET | Euroopa Liidu Teataja | C 384/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.12.2011

ET

Euroopa Liidu Teataja

C 384/1

---

Euro vahetuskurss (1)

30. detsember 2011

2011/C 384/01

1 euro =

| | Valuuta | Kurss |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | USA dollar | 1,2939 |
| JPY | Jaapani jeen | 100,20 |
| DKK | Taani kroon | 7,4342 |
| GBP | Inglise nael | 0,83530 |
| SEK | Rootsi kroon | 8,9120 |
| CHF | Šveitsi frank | 1,2156 |
| ISK | Islandi kroon | |
| NOK | Norra kroon | 7,7540 |
| BGN | Bulgaaria lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Tšehhi kroon | 25,787 |
| HUF | Ungari forint | 314,58 |
| LTL | Leedu litt | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Läti latt | 0,6995 |
| PLN | Poola zlott | 4,4580 |
| RON | Rumeenia leu | 4,3233 |
| TRY | Türgi liir | 2,4432 |
| AUD | Austraalia dollar | 1,2723 |
| CAD | Kanada dollar | 1,3215 |
| HKD | Hongkongi dollar | 10,0510 |
| NZD | Uus-Meremaa dollar | 1,6737 |
| SGD | Singapuri dollar | 1,6819 |
| KRW | Korea won | 1 498,69 |
| ZAR | Lõuna-Aafrika rand | 10,4830 |
| CNY | Hiina jüaan | 8,1588 |
| HRK | Horvaatia kuna | 7,5370 |
| IDR | Indoneesia ruupia | 11 731,47 |
| MYR | Malaisia ringit | 4,1055 |
| PHP | Filipiini peeso | 56,754 |
| RUB | Vene rubla | 41,7650 |
| THB | Tai baht | 40,991 |
| BRL | Brasiilia reaal | 2,4159 |
| MXN | Mehhiko peeso | 18,0512 |
| INR | India ruupia | 68,7130 |

Valuuta

Kurss

USD

USA dollar

1,2939

JPY

Jaapani jeen

100,20

DKK

Taani kroon

7,4342

GBP

Inglise nael

0,83530

SEK

Rootsi kroon

8,9120

CHF

Šveitsi frank

1,2156

ISK

Islandi kroon

NOK

Norra kroon

7,7540

BGN

Bulgaaria lev

1,9558

CZK

Tšehhi kroon

25,787

HUF

Ungari forint

314,58

LTL

Leedu litt

3,4528

LVL

Läti latt

0,6995

PLN

Poola zlott

4,4580

RON

Rumeenia leu

4,3233

TRY

Türgi liir

2,4432

AUD

Austraalia dollar

1,2723

CAD

Kanada dollar

1,3215

HKD

Hongkongi dollar

10,0510

NZD

Uus-Meremaa dollar

1,6737

SGD

Singapuri dollar

1,6819

KRW

Korea won

1 498,69

ZAR

Lõuna-Aafrika rand

10,4830

CNY

Hiina jüaan

8,1588

HRK

Horvaatia kuna

7,5370

IDR

Indoneesia ruupia

11 731,47

MYR

Malaisia ringit

4,1055

PHP

Filipiini peeso

56,754

RUB

Vene rubla

41,7650

THB

Tai baht

40,991

BRL

Brasiilia reaal

2,4159

MXN

Mehhiko peeso

18,0512

INR

India ruupia

68,7130

---

(1)  Allikas: EKP avaldatud viitekurss.

---
Before the First Division,

November 7, 1958

No. 62427.

#### R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 292805-K, etc. (New York).

Mollison, Judge:

When the eases enumerated in the schedule attached to this decision were called for trial, after numerous continuances, on October 6, 1958, counsel for the plaintiff requested a continuance for an indefinite period on the ground that an application with respect to similar merchandise was pending before the Treasury Department for a ruling affecting the classification thereof. It was indicated that the determination of that application might affect the ultimate disposition which might be sought by the plaintiff in these cases, although the said ruling would not be applicable directly to these cases.

It appearing that the plaintiff had no present or discernable intention in the future of prosecuting these cases in this court, the jurisdiction of which had been invoked by the filing of the protests, the eases were ordered dismissed for want of prosecution.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.1



                                 CERTIFICATION



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


(SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES
                                     CODE)



Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Allianz Aktiengesellschaft, a German company (the
"Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:



The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2002 as amended
by this Amendment No. 1 on Form 20-F/A (the "Amended Report") of the Company
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Amended Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.



Date: November 28, 2003



                                          /s/ MICHAEL DIEKMANN

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

                                          Michael Diekmann

                                          Chief Executive Officer
# December 2022
USDA - PESTICIDE DATA PROGRAM EFFECTIVE 1-1-2000
Honorable Ernest Tibbets

Cbuntg'Attorney HaIe County - Plainview,Texas

_ Dear Sir: OpinionNo. O-4122 .-.' -. .'_. ,.. Re: Whether a temporary a&ninlstrator imast

pay the Fax'aiid'afflx the stampsprovided for in. -~. ArticleXV of House Bill 

### 8, 47th Legislature. .~ ..-...~ _,. We acknowledge receipt of your request for an opinion of thisDepartment-on whether OF not-the tax acQuirea bji-'A&lb-le XV of House Bill 

### 8, 47th‘~Leglslatizre, must be pal.a

on ti%inWfers OTTstockby‘.atemporary administrator to the heirsat law and the stamps affixed thereto.

.

Article XV, supra, provides that: i _ . "There Is hereby Imposed-'and levied a-'tax.

. . . on . . .deliveries or transfers of'shares, or certificates of stock, oi'certlflcatesfor rights tb stock, or certificates of deposit representing-fan

Interest in or representingcertlflcatesmade taxable under this Section In any domestic or foreign corporation,
. . .' (Underscoring ours)

. And said Article XV further provides that: rr a . 0 It shall be the duty of the person or persons makim. or effectuating the sale or transfer to procure, affix, and cancel the stamps and pay the tax providedby this Article
. . .' (Underscoringours)

_ -

It will be noted that the'above act Is not onIy a tax onthe sales of stock, etc., but Is also a tax on the transfer of-.stock.,Thepurpose of the act manifestly being to tax all transactionswherein the ownership of stock is cha,nged.

While It-is true that the-'tltle.to the'stock-Is vested in the heirs immediatelyupon the death of the decedent,~'(Smith vs. Price, 230 S. W. 

### 836) the delivery or transfer of the stock

### . page2 o-43.22

.~ .,

some means. In or stbbk certificates,nuapt be'effectuateaby this case the administrator malcestne transrer. Hon. Ernest Tlbbets,

You are, therefore, advl'secl that unde? Artlcle'XV, siiprB,

It Is the dutjiof the temporery administrator to j%y the tax and affix the stamps an the stocky certlflcateshe transfers.

_ a-' _.. .~. : .'
_ " Trusting that the foregoing fully answers your lnquirg,we are Yours very truly ATTORNEY GENEFUL OF TEXAS

RHC:N:wc By s/RlChWd H. Cock& Ritih&M H. Cocke Assistant

APPROVXD OCT 23; 1941 s/Grover Sellers FIRSTASSISTANT ATTORNEYGENERAL _. _. Approved Opinion CommitteeBy s/&lB Chairman
September 10, 1947

No. *51904.*

*Suit 4556.*

#### *United States*v. *McLaughlin &*Freeman.

C. D. 1008 reversed June 3, 1947. C. A. D. 368.
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 1 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 2 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 3 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 4 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 5 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 6 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 7 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 8 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 9 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 10 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 11 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 12 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 13 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 14 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 15 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 16 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 17 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 18 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 19 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 20 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 21 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 22 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 23 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 24 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 25 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 26 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 27 of 28
Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 95 Filed 07/21/2003 Page 28 of 28
<Page>

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the use in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 11 to Registration
Statement No. 333-91921 of Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company Separate
Account Seven on Form N-4, of our report dated March 26, 2003 of Hartford Life
and Annuity Insurance Company relating to the statutory financial statements as
of and for the year ended December 31, 2002 and of our report dated February 21,
2003 of Hartford Life and Annuity Insurance Company Separate Account Seven
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
# C_2018161EN.01001101.xml

| 7.5.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.5.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 7 March 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa — Latvia) — DW v Valsts sociālās apdrošināšanas aģentūra

(Case C-651/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Social security - Maternity benefit - Calculation of the amount on the basis of the income of the insured person during a reference period of 12 months - Person employed, during that period, by an EU institution - National legislation fixing the amount at issue at 70 % of the average contribution basis - Restriction on freedom of movement for workers - Principle of sincere cooperation))

(2018/C 161/12)

Language of the case: Latvian

Referring court

Referring court

Augstākā tiesa

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: DW

Applicant:

Defendant: Valsts sociālās apdrošināšanas aģentūra

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 45 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State such as that at issue in the main proceedings that, for the purposes of determining the average contribution basis when calculating the amount of maternity benefit, equates the months of the reference period in which the person concerned worked in an EU institution and was not insured in that Member State with a period of unemployment and applies to them the average contribution basis in that Member State, which has the effect of substantially reducing the amount of the maternity benefit granted to that person in comparison with the amount to which she would have been entitled had she been gainfully employed in that Member State alone.

---

(1)  OJ C 86, 20.3.2017.

1

---
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-17-00662-CV

In re Rolando Pablos, Secretary of State for the State of Texas, and

Keith Ingram, Director, Texas Elections Division of the Secretary of State

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Relators have filed a petition for writ of mandamus and an emergency motion for

temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1, 52.10(a). We grant the emergency motion

and temporarily stay all proceedings in the underlying case, including discovery and the

temporary-injunction hearing set for October 16, 2017, pending further order of this Court. See id.

R. 52.10(b). The Court orders the real parties in interest, League of Women Voters of Texas, Texas

State Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and

Ruthann Geer, to file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus on or before October 23, 2017.

It is so ordered October 12, 2017.

Before Justices Puryear, Field, and Bourland
Case No. 13,689.

#### SWEETSER v. HELMS et al.

[2 Ban. & A. 263; 1 10 O. G. 4.]

Circuit Court, D Massachusetts.

April 4, 1876.

Patents — Infringement—Combination—Use of Part.

The patents of the complainant, alleged to be infringed, were for machines for polishing the edges of the heels and soles of boots and shoes, in which machines there was a combination of certain mechanism for holding the sole or heel or both to be polished, with the mechanism of the polishing-tool, so that the surface to be polished and the polishing-tool were brought into proper relations with each other. The defendants’ machine dispensed with the shoe-holding mechanism, and used only the polishing-tool and its mechanism, the operator holding the surface to be polished in proper relations to the tool: *Held,*no infringement.

[Cited in Dodge v. Fearey, 8 Fed. 329.]

[For another case involving this patent, see Dodge v. Feary, 8 Fed. 329.]

[This was a bill in equity by David H. Sweetser, trustee, against Charles H. Helms and others.]

Thomas L. Livermore, for complainant.

James E. Maynadier, for defendants.

SHEPLEY, Circuit Judge.

The bill in this ease charges infringements of three patents — one to Elias S. Ingalls, dated May 8, 1860 (No. 2S,181), for “improvements in machines for burnishing the edge of the sole and heel of boots and shoes,” one to Benjamin Q. Budding, dated August 18, 1803 (No. 39,546), for “improved heel-polishing machine,” and one to Benjamin Q. Budding, dated May 3, 1864 (No. 42,555), for “improved machine for polishing the heels of boots and shoes.” These patents all relate to a class of machines for polishing the edges of the heels and soles of boots and shoes, in which there is a combination of certain mechanism for holding the sole or heel or both to be polished with the mechanism of the polishing-tool, under such conditions of mechanical combination that either the holding mechanism, with the material held, can be so moved as to bring the surface to be polished in proper relations to the polishing-tool, or the polishing tool can be so operated as to bring it into proper relations with the surface to be polished of the material held by the holding mechanism.

The Helms machine, alleged to be an infringement, differs from these machines in this essential feature. There is no attempt in the Helms machine to so combine a shoe-holding mechanism with the polishing-tool and its mechanism that the two will operate properly together. On the contrary, in the Helms machine the shoe-holding mechanism is dispensed with, and the operator puts the shoe into proper relations with the polishing-tool, and holds and keeps and guides it there, by and with his own muscular strength and will. There is no shoe-holding mechanism which is made to travel in a fixed path in relation to the polishing-tool, nor any polishing tool made to travel in any fixed path in combination with or in any relation to a shoe-holding mechanism.

This radical difference between the two classes of machines is fatal to the claim of infringement, and renders unnecessary a consideration of the other questions presented at the argument of the case. Bill dismissed.