alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 49579.

#### Protests 87686-K, etc., of B. R. Anderson & Co. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial one of the importers testified that his com-

pany manufactures agricultural drain tile, that he has observed the manufacture of drain tile at the plant of the exporter, that it is made from clay which is removed from the clay bank with a steam shovel, dried, and then ground and mixed with water and put through á tiling machine, that it is exuded from the machine in the form of the imported merchandise, cut into pieces and dried in a drier, and that thereafter it is burned in a kiln; that the tile is composed entirely of clay as it comes from the clay bank and when “green” is of a yellowish-gray color, and after firing it is a red brick color. He further testified that the article is made of unwashed, unmixed clay which has not been artificially colored, and that it is commonly used throughout the United States to drain farming land or placed around the foundation of houses for drainage purposes. A sample tile, a leaflet describing agricultural drain tile manufactured by the exporter, and a customs laboratory report stating that the same is composed of a natural clay body which has been fired in a kiln but not vitrified or glazed, were admitted in evidence. An examination of the tile in evidence showed that it is not ornamented, incised, or decorated in any manner. However, in view of Tariff Information, Surveys, Vol. 2, which was before Congress at the time of preparation of the 1922 tariff act, and the Summary of Tariff Information, 1929, Vol. 1, the court found that merchandise such as that here in question has been classified through several successive tariff acts as articles composed of earthy or mineral substances and that from the tariff history it is clear Congress intended the same to be so classified. The protests were therefore overruled.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              MAR-03-2001
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-03-2000
<CASH>                                                  854
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        45,733
<ALLOWANCES>                                          (951)
<INVENTORY>                                          83,471
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    133,811
<PP&E>                                               48,705
<DEPRECIATION>                                       31,560
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      266,550
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               113,787
<BONDS>                                             267,950
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                20,002
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                                165
<OTHER-SE>                                        (151,235)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        266,550
<SALES>                                              70,619
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     70,619
<CGS>                                                49,627
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        49,627
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     21,292
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    8,192
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (8,492)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        (3,990)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (4,502)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (4,502)
<EPS-BASIC>                                               0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0



</TABLE>
No. 61288.

protest 299262-K (New York).

#### Ira Furman Co., a/c Azrak-Hamway, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of table lighters similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 59275, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1450 

To prohibit cell phone voice communications during passenger flights. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 28, 2017 

Mr. ALEXANDER (for himself and Mr. MARKEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To prohibit cell phone voice communications during 

passenger flights. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Commercial Flight 

5 Courtesy Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CELL PHONE VOICE COMMUNICA7 TIONS DURING PASSENGER FLIGHTS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter I of chapter 417 of 

9 title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

10 end the following: 


rfrederick on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1450 IS

1 ‘‘§ 41725. Prohibition on certain cell phone voice com2 munications 

3 ‘‘(a) PROHIBITION.—The Secretary of Transpor4 tation shall issue regulations— 

5 ‘‘(1) to prohibit an individual on an aircraft 

6 from engaging in voice communications using a mo7 bile communications device during a flight of that 

8 aircraft in scheduled passenger interstate air trans9 portation or intrastate air transportation; and 

10 ‘‘(2) that exempt from the prohibition described 

11 in paragraph (1)— 

12 ‘‘(A) any member of the flight crew on 

13 duty on an aircraft; and 

14 ‘‘(B) any Federal law enforcement officer 

15 acting in an official capacity. 

16 ‘‘(b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

17 ‘‘(1) FLIGHT.—The term ‘flight’ means, with 

18 respect to an aircraft, the period beginning when the 

19 aircraft takes off and ending when the aircraft 

20 lands. 

21 ‘‘(2) MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS DEVICE.— 

22 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The term ‘mobile 

23 communications device’ means any portable 

24 wireless telecommunications equipment utilized 

25 for the transmission or reception of voice data. 


rfrederick on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1450 IS

1 ‘‘(B) LIMITATION.—The term ‘mobile com2 munications device’ does not include a phone in3 stalled on an aircraft.’’. 

4 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

5 for chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code, is amend6 ed by inserting after the item relating to section 41724 

7 the following new item: 

‘‘41725. Prohibition on certain cell phone voice communications.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
ManagingandEnhancingtheAirport'sEnvironmentAnnualnvironmentalort2010PROGRESSUPDATEHartsfield-JacksonAtlantaInternationalAirport(ATL),theworld,sbusiestairport,isownedandoperatedbytheCityofAtlanta(City),DepartmentofAviation(DOA).ATL'senvironmentalcomplianceandmanagementisextremelyimportanttotheCityofAtlanta.ThegroupchallengedwiththisresponsibilityisDOA'sPlanningandEnvironmentalDivision,formerlyknownastheEnvironmentalandTechnicalServices(ETS)Division.In2009,theDOAdocumentedandreportedtheenvironmentalcomplianceandmanagementeffortsmadebytheDepartmentintheformofanAnnualEnvironmentalReport(AER). The2009AER(http://www.atlanta-airport.com/docs/Airport/Environmental/2oog%2oAnnual%2oEnv%2oReport_Revised%2o5-27-10.pdfenvironmental)providedabackgroundonpastandon-goinginitiativesin2oog.Progressmadeontheseinitiativesandadditionaleffortsundertakensincethenareprovidedinthis2010ProgressUpdate...A.Hartsfield-JacksonInternationalAirport1 Annual Environmental

Report 2010 PROGRESS

UPDATE

80,000,000

T

1 .6 _....._

li; 60,000,000

1.2

g> - -

... "' 40

, 000

, 000

0

. 8

"' **~** 20

. 000

, 000

0

. 4

**~** "' 0

0

0 **~** 2006

2007

2008

2009

2010 -+- Annual Quantity

Disposed

(lbs) - Annual Passenger Enplanement Quantity Disposed

/ Passenger EnplanementPermitNameSpentA1rcraftDe1c1ngFlUidAircraftRescueandfnef1ght111gTra1mngFaohty200820092010•70DNL65DNL.JL Hartsfield-Jackson Mlna lntarnlltlonel

Airport
# \", D'p. JI r

Martin 0 Malley Governor 

# Maryland

# Departmentof Planning RichardEberhart Hall Secretary Anthony G. Brown Matthew

### J. Power Lt. Governor Deputy Secretary May 4,2009

Ms. Deborah Rabin Regulations Coordinator, Air and Radiation Management Administration Maryland Department ofthe Environment 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730 Baltimore, MD 21230-1720 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE REVIEW PROCESS

State Application Identifier: MD20090504-0535 Project Description: Proposed revisions to the Maryland State Implementation Plan: update requirements for Prevention of Significant Deterioration; amend regulations on Sintering Plants, and Power Station electric Generating Units: public hearing 5/28/09 Project Location: Maryland Clearinghouse Contact: Bob Rosenbush Dear Ms. Rabin: Thank you for submitting your project for intergovernmental review. Participation in the Maryland Intergovernmental Review and Coordination (MIRC) process helps ensure project consistency with plans, programs, and objectives ofState agencies and local governments. Notice ofyour application is being provided to State and local public officials through the 

### IntergovernmentalMonitor, which is a weekly Internet publication identifying projects received by the State Clearinghouse for Intergovernmental Assistance. This document may be viewed at http://www.mdp.state.md.us/CLHOUSE/monitorfy04.htm. The project has been assigned a unique State Application Identifier that should be used on all documents and correspondence. One form is enclosed with this letter. The "Project Status Form" should be completed and returned after you receive notice that your project was approved or disapproved. All MIRC requirements have been met in accordance with Code ofMaryland Regulations (COMAR 14.24.04) and this concludes the review process for the above referenced project. If you need assistance or have questions, contact the State Clearinghouse staff person noted above at 410-767-4490 or through e-mail atbrosenbush@rndp.state.rnd.us. Thank you for your cooperation with the MIRC process. Sincerely,

# ~v 

# t:**··~I7}UAr-** Linda C. Janey, J.D., Assistant Secretary . for Clearinghouse and Communications LCJ:BR Enclosure cc: Kathleen Blinebury -EPA 09-0535_NMNEWdoc

301 WestPreston Street

- Suite 1101

- Baltimore, Mary/and 21201-2305 Telephone: 410.767.4500

- Fax: 410.767.4480

- TollFree: 1.877.767.6272 - TIY Users: Mary/and Rtltry Internet: www.MDP.state.md.us
# 2022 (2021Y)

Admitted Reinsurer Companies
Related cases: 

Health related cases: 

Conce1·n levels: 

Type of Concern: 

Level of Concern: 

Health 

1-2 

Persistence 

1 

Exposure Based Review: 

Health: No 

Ecotox: No 

Routes of exposure: 

P2Rec Comments: 

SAT Report 

PMN Number: P-15-0382 

SAT Date: 4/14/2015 

Print Date: 5/8/2015 

Eco Comments 

3 

Bioaccum 

1 

Toxicity 

1 

Health: De1mal Inhalation 

Ecotox: All releases to water 

Fate: ; 

Comment: F01ward 

Keywords: 

Comments 

Keywords: DEVEL BLOOD HEART UNCERT-IMMUNO AQUATOX-A,C 

Summary of Assessment: 

FATE 

Solid 

S > 500 giL at 25 oc (M) 

VP < l.OE-6 ton at 25 C (E) 

BP > 400 C (E) 
H < 1.00£-8 (E) 

POTWremoval (%) = 90 via biodeg; OECD 301A(Ready Biodeg): Analogs #1: 94.6%(avg), #2 

81.3%(avg), #3 72.7%(avg), #4 93.2%(avg), #5 90.5%/28d. 

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = da-wk 

S01ption to soils/sediments = low 

PBT Potential: P1B1 

*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = slow due to biodeg 

,... .... ,r • ...,.n is nil through the skin; abs01p tion 

m rats -no at 

21-day dennal study in rats -no effects at 2000 mg/kg 

Not an eye initant 

Ecotox: 

Test Organism Test Test End Predicted 

Type Point 

fish 96-h LC50 20 

daphnid 48-h LC50 1.9 

green algal 96-h EC50 0.18 

fish chronic value 1.1 

daphnid - chronic 0.34 

value 

algal - chronic 0.043 

value 

Sewage Sludg«: 3-h EC50 

Sewage Sludg«: - Chronic - Value 

poor through the lungs and GI u·act 

be a with concem for 

There is also uncettain concem 

Measured Comments 

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs SAR chemical class 

solid with mp 

unknown (P); S > 500 giL at 20 C (M); pH7; effective concenu·ations based on 100% active 

ingredients and mean measmed concenu·ations; DWhardness <150.0 mg/L as CaC03; and 

DWTOC <2.0 mg/L; 

Factors Values Comments 

Assessment Factor 10 
Ecotox Factors Comments: 

SATChair:-
# sec6_rsnc_2021

&"Arial,Bold"&10Bulletin No. 2021-20	&"Arial,Bold"&10Draft	&"Arial,Bold"&10August 2021
No. 66278.

#### Walter Hatches, Inc., and W. J. Byrnes & Co. of N.Y., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/15649 and 60/15982 (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of candlestick holders similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Mottahedeh Creations, Ltd., et al.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 9, C.D. 2095), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
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 on Form 10-Q of Merrill Lynch
Preferred Capital Trust III and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding III, L.P.
(the "Partnership") for the period ended September 24, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, John J. Fosina, Controller of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., the General
Partner of the Partnership, 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 results of operations of the
    Partnership.




                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED FUNDING III, L.P.

                              By:  MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., as General Partner


                              By:  /s/ JOHN J. FOSINA
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    John J. Fosina *
                              Title:   Controller, Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.








Dated: November 3, 2004
_______________________

*  John J. Fosina functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
   and Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership for purposes of Section 906
   of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
# July 2022
No. 62506.

#### P. John Hanrahan, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 324741-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.
(Reap. Dec. 8620)

Entry No. 23232, etc.

#### New York Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided July 6, 1956)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the Appeals to Reappraisement enumerated above consists of mirrors imported from Japan.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the market value or the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States at *479which, such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for export to the United States including costs of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise ready for shipment to the United States was the appraised values less additions made under so called duress relating to the so-called shipping charges embracing inland freight, insurance premium, hawling [sic], lighterage, etc.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher domestic value for merchandise such or similar to the merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeals to Reap-praisement enumerated above may be submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as the value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were the appraised values, less the additions made under so-called duress relating to the so-called shipping charges embracing inland freight, insurance premium, hauling, lighterage, etc.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
# Data

&"Calibri,Bold"&16&KFF0000DRAFT	

&"Arial,Bold"&10Bulletin No. 2020-15	&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000DRAFT&K01+000 VII VSR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"&10IRC Handout 4/23/20
# C_2016343EN.01003401.xml

| 19.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 343/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 343/34

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Rheinland-Pfalz (Germany) lodged on 11 July 2016 — Hornbach-Baumarkt-AG v Finanzamt Landau

(Case C-382/16)

(2016/C 343/46)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Finanzgericht Rheinland-Pfalz

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Hornbach-Baumarkt-AG

Applicant:

Defendant: Finanzamt Landau

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Does Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in conjunction with Article 54 TFEU, (formerly Article 43 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), in conjunction with Article 48 EC), preclude legislation of a Member State which provides that income of a resident taxpayer derived from business relations with a company established in another Member State in which that taxpayer has a direct or indirect shareholding of at least 25 % and with which that taxpayer has agreed terms that depart from those that would have been agreed on by unrelated third parties under the same or similar circumstances must be calculated as if that income had been earned pursuant to terms agreed on between unrelated third parties, if such a correction is not made in respect of income from business relations with a resident company and the legislation in question does not afford the resident taxpayer the opportunity to present evidence that the terms were agreed on for commercial reasons resulting from its status as a shareholder of the company established in the other Member State?

---
**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 Annual Report of Independence Lead Mines Company (the
        "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed
        with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
        I, Bernard C. Lannen, President 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 results of operations of the Company.
 
 The
        foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
        pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of
        Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not
        to be
        incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before
        or
        after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in
        such
        filing.
 
 /s/
        Bernard C. Lannen
 President
 
 Dated:
        October 15, 2008
Case 2:02-cv-04447-JKG Document 3 Filed 09/18/2002 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

AAMCO TRANSMISSIONS, INC. : CIVIL ACTION

:

 Plaintiff :

: No. 05-CV-1773

v. :

:

MICHAEL L. SCHWARTZWALD :

:

 Defendant :

NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

TO THE CLERK:

Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1), no answer or responsive pleading having

been filed by defendant, plaintiff AAMCO Transmissions, Inc., of its own action,

hereby discontinues this action and dismisses the complaint with prejudice. 

Dated: May 2, 2005 ________________________

Karen A. von Dreusche

Suite 300

One Presidential Boulevard

Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004

(610) 668-2900

Case 2:05-cv-01773-PBT Document 5 Filed 05/02/05 Page 1 of 1
# C_2022073EN.01004301.xml

| 14.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/43

---

Order of the General Court of 29 November 2021 — Aresu v Commission

(Case T-524/16) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - 2014 Reform of the Staff Regulations - Travelling time - Home leave - Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

(2022/C 73/53)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Antonio Aresu (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Gattinara and F. Blanc, acting as Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendant: European Parliament (represented by: E. Tavena and M. Ecker, acting as Agents), Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and R. Meyer, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU seeking annulment of the decision no longer to grant the applicant, as of 1 January 2014, travelling time of five days which he enjoyed previously on the basis of Article 7 of Annex V to the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union, as amended by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1023/2013 of the European Parliament and the Council of 22 October 2013 (OJ 2013 L 287, p. 15).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Antonio Aresu shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission, including those of the interlocutory proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Antonio Aresu shall bear his own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission, including those of the interlocutory proceedings.

| 3. | The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union shall bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2015 (case initially registered before the European Union Civil Service Tribunal under number F-106/14 and transferred to the General Court of the European Union on 1.9.2016).

---