alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 49961.

#### Protest 79441-K of Aeration Processes, Inc. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

When the case was called for hearing it was agreed by counsel that the entry was made under duress and that the collector failed to issue notice of appraisement. Plaintiff cites *United States*v. *Nippon Dry Goods Co.*(13 Cust. Ct. 373, Reap. Dec. 6054) as supporting its contention. The court held that the claim of the plaintiff was well founded, that it was the duty of the collector under the statute to send written notice of appraisement, and that that action not having been taken, the liquidation was null and void. The protest was sustained to that extent.
<PAGE>

                                                                       Exhibit 1

                           HOLMES FINANCING (NO.2) PLC
                                    04056122

                              ABBEY NATIONAL HOUSE
                         2 TRITON SQUARE, REGENTS PLACE
                                 LONDON NW1 3AN

I, Martin McDermott, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F, and all reports on Form 6-K
containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periods
included in the year covered by this annual report, of HOLMES FINANCING (NO.2)
PLC;

2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole,
does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to
be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and servicing, or
similar, agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and upon representations made to me by the servicer,
and except as disclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its
obligations under the servicing agreement; and

5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the servicer's
compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon representations made
to me by the servicer.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Abbey National plc.

Date: 30 June 2003


/s/ Martin McDermott
-----------------------------
Martin McDermott
Director
Case 2:02-cv-04360-RBS Document 60 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:02-cv-04360-RBS Document 60 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 2 of 2
No. 76-5778.

No. 76-6040.

#### Gamble *v.*Alabama; and Clark *v.*Malley, Warden.

Motions for leave to file petitions for writs of habeas corpus denied.
DATE OF NOTICE: December 16, 2002

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES EX REL. : CIVIL ACTION

ZHELYATDINOV, SERGEY :

:

 v. :

 :

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL : 02-cv-4318

JOHN ASHCROFT :

NOTICE

Oral argument will be held on Thursday, December 19, 2002 at 1:30 p.m. with the

Honorable Michael M. Baylson in Courtroom 8-A regarding the Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus.

 

Lynn Meyer

Deputy Clerk to Judge Baylson

267.299.7521

cc: Tatiana Aristova, Esq. (fax)

Stephen J. Britt, Esq. (fax)

O:\Notices\Zhelyatdinov v. Ashcroft - Notice oral argument.wpd

Case 2:02-cv-04318-MMB Document 11 Filed 12/16/2002 Page 1 of 1
# C_2017161EN.01000402.xml

| 22.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 30 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria — Hungary) — József Lingurár v Miniszterelnökséget vezető miniszter

(Case C-315/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common agricultural policy - EAFRD financing - Rural development support - Natura 2000 payments - Eligibility limited to private owners - Forest area partially owned by the State))

(2017/C 161/05)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Referring court

Kúria

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: József Lingurár

Applicant:

Defendant: Miniszterelnökséget vezető miniszter

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The first sentence of Article 42(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) must be interpreted as meaning that, when a forest area eligible for Natura 2000 support is owned in part by the State and in part by a private owner, account must be taken of the ratio of the size of the part owned by the State to the size of the part owned by that private owner in calculating the amount of support to be paid to the latter.

---

(1)  OJ C 296, 16.8.2016.

1

---
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas May 26, 2021 No. 04-20-00486-CR Jemadari Chinua WILLIAMS ,

Appellant

v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. B19-346 Honorable Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Appellant Jemadari Chinua Williams, proceeding pro se, filed his Appellant’s brief in February 2021. With leave of court, Williams filed a supplement to his insufficiency point of error in March. The State’s brief was filed April 20, 2021, and Williams’s reply brief is now due June 9, 2021. On May 21, 2021, this court received Williams’s motion for leave to supplement his appellant’s brief with an amended argument for his point of error alleging he received ineffective assistance of counsel. We grant the motion. We order Williams may amend his argument for point of error five that alleges ineffective assistance of counsel. The amended argument must be made in Williams’s reply brief due June 9, 2021. We further order the State may respond to the amended point of error in a supplemental response due thirty days after Williams’s reply brief is received.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 26th day of May, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL : CIVIL ACTION

SERVICES :

:

 v. :

:

SAWTELLE FAMILY LIMITED :

PARTNERSHIP, WILLIAM SAWTELLE :

AND PATTI COLE : NO. 02-4203

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 19th day of August, 2002, upon review of

the record, the Court notes that service of the Complaint was

made by personal service upon Defendant, Patti Cole, on July 20,

2002, and on Defendants William Sawtelle and Sawtelle Family

Limited Partnership on July 19, 2002. The court further notes

that a pleading has not been filed in the above captioned action

in response to the Complaint. If a Request for Default is not

filed by September 2, 2002, the Court may enter an Order

dismissing the case against the above named Defendants for lack

of prosecution.

 BY THE COURT:

 

 

 JOHN R. PADOVA, J.

Case 2:02-cv-04203-JP Document 4 Filed 08/19/2002 Page 1 of 1
# C_2018032EN.01000501.xml

| 29.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/5

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 16 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Ministarstvo pomorstva, prometa i infrastrukture — Uprava zračnog prometa, elektroničkih komunikacija i pošte — Croatia) — Hrvatska agencija za civilno zrakoplovstvo v Air Serbia A.D. Beograd, Dane Kondić

(Case C-476/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Whether the body making a reference is a ‘court or tribunal’ - Independence - Manifest Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling))

(2018/C 032/06)

Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Referring court

Ministarstvo pomorstva, prometa i infrastrukture — Uprava zračnog prometa, elektroničkih komunikacija i pošte

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Hrvatska agencija za civilno zrakoplovstvo

Applicant:

Defendant: Air Serbia A.D. Beograd, Dane Kondić

Defendant:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Ministarstvo pomorstva, prometa i infrastrukture — Uprava zračnog prometa, elektroničkih komunikacija i pošte (Ministry of Maritime Affairs, Transport and Infrastructure — Directorate for Air Transport, Electronic Communications and Postal Services, Croatia), by decision of 26 August 2016, is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  OJ C 419, 14.11.2016.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MICHELE RICCI : CIVIL ACTION

v. :

:

AETNA, INC. d/b/a AETNA U.S. HEALTHCARE : NO. 02-4330

AND AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 24th day of February, 2003, upon consideration of correspondence to the

Court from Plaintiff’s counsel dated February 12, 2003, and February 20, 2003, as well as

correspondence from Defendants’ counsel dated February 13, 2003, it is hereby ORDERED that a

Telephone Status Conference concerning the above-captioned action will take place on February

26, 2003, at 2:30 p.m. to discuss the above-mentioned correspondence. Plaintiff’s counsel shall

initiate this conference call to (215) 507-6079.

BY THE COURT:

 

M. FAITH ANGELL

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:02-cv-04330-TJS Document 20 Filed 02/24/2003 Page 1 of 1
Before the Third Division,

December 10, 1959

No. 63587.

protest 58/11244 (New York).

#### Sam Sontag *v.*United States,

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.
No. 49576.

#### Protest 106947-K of Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The claim appeared to be amply supported by the record, counsel having stipulated as true the statement of the appraiser, which is in evidence, that the articles are composed in chief value of lead, and that the net weight of each article is approximately 1 ounce. In accordance therewith this claim was sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       4,706,092
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,281,891
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      91,073,012
<DEPRECIATION>                              34,967,641
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             155,077,959
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       13,598,320
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                (32,860,361)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               155,077,959
<SALES>                                     14,497,069
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            14,497,069
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,788,574
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,454,785
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,880,638)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,880,638)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Case 2:04-cv-03422-HB Document 10 Filed 05/17/07 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:04-cv-03422-HB Document 10 Filed 05/17/07 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:04-cv-03422-HB Document 10 Filed 05/17/07 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:04-cv-03422-HB Document 10 Filed 05/17/07 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:04-cv-03422-HB Document 10 Filed 05/17/07 Page 5 of 5
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION (UNAUDITED) 196 

Tax Assessments

The Government is authorized and required to make inquiries, determinations, and assessments of all taxes that have not

been duly paid. Unpaid assessments result from taxpayers filing returns without sufficient payment, as well as enforcement

programs such as examination, under-reporter, substitute for return, and combined annual wage reporting. Under federal

accounting standard, unpaid assessments are categorized as taxes receivable if taxpayers agree or a court has determined the

assessments are owed. If neither of these conditions are met, the unpaid assessments are categorized as compliance

assessments. Assessments with little or no future collection potential are called write-offs. Although compliance assessments

and write-offs are not considered receivables under federal accounting standards, they represent legally enforceable claims of

the Government. There is, however, a significant difference in the collection potential between compliance assessments and

receivables.

Compliance assessments and pre-assessment work in process are $75.8 billion and $77.3 billion for fiscal years 2017

and 2016, respectively. The amount of allowance for uncollectible amounts pertaining to compliance assessments cannot be

reasonably estimated, and thus the net realizable value of the value of the pre-assessment work-in-process cannot be

determined. The amount of assessments that agencies have statutory authority to collect at the end of the period but that have

been written off and excluded from accounts receivable are $111.0 billion and $139.0 billion for fiscal years 2017 and 2016,

respectively.
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 10-51079 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. TYRICE HEGWOOD, also known as Tyrece Hedgemond, Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:09-CR-3143-12
Before KING, JOLLY, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Tyrice Hegwood presents arguments that are foreclosed by United States
v. Tickles , 661 F.3d 212, 2 1 4

- 1 5 (5th Cir. 2011), which held that the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (FSA) does not apply retroactively to a defendant who is sentenced after the effective date of the FSA but wh o s e o f fense preceded the FSA’s effective d a t e . The Government has moved for summary affirmance, or for an extension of time to file a brief. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Janu ary26 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 10-51079 Document: 00511737305 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/26/2012No. 10-51079

The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRM E D

. The Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED.

2 Case: 10-51079 Document: 00511737305 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/26/2012
----

|   | 1. | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended  and |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Registrant as of and for the periods presented in the    Report. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                 | /s/  | Lynda J.      Nahra                        |
|----------------------|-----------|--------------------------------------------|
|                 |      | Lynda      J. Nahra                        |
|                 |      | President      and Chief Executive Officer |
|                 |      |                                       |
|                 |      |                                       |
|                 | /s/  | Charles G.      Baltuskonis                |
|                 |      | Charles      G. Baltuskonis                |
|                 |      | Executive      Vice President and          |
|                 |      | Chief      Financial Officer               |
| August      14, 2008 |      |                                       |

----
# C_2017022EN.01003502.xml

| 23.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/35

---

Order of the General Court of 28 November 2016 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-147/16) (1)

1

((Failure to comply with a judgment of the Court of Justice establishing that a Member State has failed to fulfil obligations - Periodic penalty payment - Judgment quantifying the amount of the periodic penalty - No need to adjudicate))

(2017/C 022/48)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and S. Fiorentino, avvocato dello Stato)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Subject matter

Subject matter

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of Commission Decision C(2016) 366 final of 28 January 2016, by which, in order to ensure compliance with the judgment of 17 November 2011, Commission v Italy, (C-496/09, EU:C:2011:740), the Commission fixed the amount of the periodic penalty owed by the Italian Republic for the six months from 18 November 2012 to 17 May 2013 and for the six months from 18 May 2013 to 17 November 2013.

Commission

Italy

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1) | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. |
| --- | --- |

1)

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.

| 2) | The European Commission shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

The European Commission shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 191, 30.5.2016.

1

---
Shared Accounting Module (SAM)

Primary Local Security Administrator (PLSA) Authorization Form

The Officer identified below designates the following to serve as Primary Local Security Administrator (PLSA) for the Shared 

Accounting Module (SAM). Each PLSA may create child Access Groups or edit the Access Groups to which they are assigned. 

Section 1 – General Information

 Create New PLSA

 Modify PLSA Information (only applies to last name, e-mail address, phone number and/or address)

 Delete PLSA (the current PLSA will not be deleted until an additional Authorization form is received to create a new 

PLSA for the Access Group)

Primary Access Group Name: (A maximum of 50 alpha numeric characters) A Primary Access Group is a group created to relate ALC(s) or 

DSSN(s) in terms of security and/or business commonality.

Section 2 – PLSA Profile

Each Access Group may have only one user designated as a PLSA

PLSAs Employer/Agency/Bureau

PLSAs Name (Full name)

PLSAs E-mail Address (Not shared)

*Please ensure accuracy – email address is the 

unique identifier of a user

Phone Number (Direct number to PLSA)

Street Address (PLSA location)

Street Address Line 2 (PLSA location)

City / State / Zip (PLSA location)

PLSA Activation Date (Please check one) Effective Immediately Future Effective Date___/____/______

Will PLSA also serve as Cash Flow Administrator

(CFA) for the Access Group? User needs access to 

Access Group Cash Flow Profiles, Default Rules and 

related reports. (Please check one) CFA role will be 

activated when PLSA role is activated.

Yes No

Section 3 – Officer Authorization

By signing below, the Officer (normally the Director of the Office of Finance, Office of Accounting, or comparable unit) certifies that he/she is duly 

authorized by the organization to designate individuals who can serve as PLSA. The authorized individual also agrees to be responsible on behalf of 

the organization for all security management related to SAM access. The authorized individual will be contacted and must confirm signature before 

request can be completed. The authorized individual signing this form cannot be designated as the user on this form.

The officer signing this form cannot be designated as a PLSA on this form.

Name (print) Signature

Title Phone ( ) - Date / /

Email Address

Please email the completed form to the SAM Treasury Support Center: SAM_TSC@stls.frb.org 
Section 4 – Access Group Agency Location Codes (ALCs)

1 17

2 18

3 19

4 20

5 21

6 22

7 23

8 24

9 25

10 26

11 27

12 28

13 29

14 30

15 31

16 32
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

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 CSK
Auto Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the period ending May 4, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Don W. Watson, hereby certify, in my
capacity as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge:



| |                                                                                                                                                                
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) The Report fully complies with the
    requirements of section 13(a) 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/ DON W. WATSON      
| |                        
| | Don W. Watson          
| | Chief Financial Officer

June 17, 2003