alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2017121EN.01003201.xml

| 18.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/32

---

Order of the General Court of 28 February 2017 — NM v European Council

(Case T-257/16) (1)

1

((Action for annulment - EU-Turkey statement of 18 March 2016 - Press release - Concept of ‘international agreement’ - Identification of the author of the act - Scope of the act - Meeting of the European Council - Meeting of the Heads of State or Government of the Member States of the European Union held on the premises of the Council of the European Union - Capacity of the representatives of the Member States of the European Union during a meeting with the representative of a third country - First paragraph of Article 263 TFEU - Lack of jurisdiction))

(2017/C 121/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: NM (represented by: B. Burns, Solicitor, P. O’Shea and I. Whelan, Barristers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Council (represented by: K. Pleśniak, Á. de Elera-San Miguel Hurtado and S. Boelaert, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and seeking the annulment of an alleged agreement concluded between the European Council and the Republic of Turkey dated 18 March 2016 and entitled ‘EU-Turkey statement, 18 March 2016’.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed on the ground of the Court’s lack of jurisdiction to hear and determine it. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed on the ground of the Court’s lack of jurisdiction to hear and determine it.

| 2. | There is no need to rule on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the Kingdom of Belgium, the Hellenic Republic and the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no need to rule on the applications for leave to intervene submitted by the Kingdom of Belgium, the Hellenic Republic and the European Commission.

| 3. | NM and the European Council shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

NM and the European Council shall bear their own costs.

| 4. | The Kingdom of Belgium, the Hellenic Republic and the Commission shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Kingdom of Belgium, the Hellenic Republic and the Commission shall bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 251, 11.7.2016.

1

---
No. 49997.

#### Protest 110267-K of Martin Stockman (New York).

. Opinion by

Keeee, J.

The Government moved to dismiss the protest because it was not filed in time. An examination of the record disclosed that the protest was filed more than 60 days after the collector’s liquidation. The Government’s motion to dismiss was granted and the protest was dismissed.
No. 64807.

#### Florida Export Corporation *v.*United States,

protest 59/25179 (Tampa).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

The protest was dismissed.
(Reap. Dec. 10659)

Entry No. 28787, etc.

#### J. W. Hampton, Jr. & Co. of Phila., a/c Yamaha Int’l Corp., et al. *v.*United States

(Decided January 7, 1964)

*&lad & Tuttle for*the plaintiffs.

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

Wilson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation entered into between counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, as follows:

> 1. That this stipulation is limited to the items marked “A” and initialed VJM (Examiner’s Initials) by Examiner V. J. McGettigan (Examiner’s Name) on the invoices covered by the appeals for reappraisément listed on Schedule “A” annexed.

> 2. That the merchandise was imported after the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (Public Law 927, 84th Congress, T.D. 54165).

> 3. That the items marked “A” consist of motorcycles; that said items are not identified on the Pinal List published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to said Customs Simplification Act (T.D. 54521), and accordingly are subject to appraisement under the provisions of section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by said Customs Simplification Act.

> 4. That on or about the dates of exportation, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, said prices including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for .shipment to the United States, were equal to the P.O.B. invoice unit prices.

> *4056. The appeals may he submitted on this stipulation, the same being limited to the merchandise and the issues described hereinabove and abandoned in all other respects.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold export value, as that value is defined in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the involved merchandise and that such values were equal to the f .o.b. invoice unit prices.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

MBC DEVELOPMENT, LP, MBC MANAGEMENT, LLC, MBC PROPERTIES, LP, JAMES L. MILLER, MILLER PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT, LLC, MARTIN CERULLO, WILLIAM KIRWAN

v.

JAMES W. MILLER

PETITION OF: MBC DEVELOPMENT, LP, MBC MANAGEMENT, LLC, MBC PROPERTIES, LP, JAMES L. MILLER, AND MILLER PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT,

LLC :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 387 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 4 th day of January, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED . The issue, rephrased for clarity is:

Whether a limited partner can force arbitration of his challenges to a special litigation committee

— despite the Limited Partnership Act’s mandate that a partnership agreement “may not . . . vary” the Act’s requirement that those challenges be subjected only to a “court review”?
Exhibit 32(i)

CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The
undersigned hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, (i) the Form 10-K filed by Carolina Bank Holdings, Inc. (the Issuer) for the year ended December 31, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer on the dates and for the
periods presented therein.



|      |  |                |  |  |  |                                      
|----- |  | -------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|      |  |                | 
|Date: |  | March 24, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ Robert T. Braswell               
|      |  |                |  |  |  | Robert T. Braswell                   
|      |  |                |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer



|      |  |                |  |  |  |                                                         
|----- |  | -------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------------------------------
|      |  |                | 
|Date: |  | March 24, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ T. Allen Liles                                      
|      |  |                |  |  |  | T. Allen Liles                                          
|      |  |                |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer
No. 61282.

protests 246850-K, etc. (New York).

#### A. V. Olsson Trading Co. et al. *v.*United States,

*465Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of sprats in oil, packed in tins, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Arnold Sorensin Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 199, C. D. 1862), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
IC 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1285 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 30, 2017 

Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

AN ACT 

To allow the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, 

and Siuslaw Indians, the Confederated Tribes of the 

Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, the Confederated 

Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon, the Confederated 

Tribes of Warm Springs, the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, the Klamath Tribes, and the Burns 

Paiute Tribes to lease or transfer certain lands. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

S 1285 RFH

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 ‘‘Oregon Tribal Eco5 nomic Development Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED TO VALIDATE LAND 

7 TRANSACTIONS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi9 sion of law, without further approval, ratification, or au10 thorization by the United States, the Confederated Tribes 

11 of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Confed12 erated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, 

13 the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon, the 

14 Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, the Cow Creek 

15 Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, the Klamath Tribes, 

16 and the Burns Paiute Tribes may lease, sell, convey, war17 rant, or otherwise transfer all or any part of its interests 

18 in any real property that is not held in trust by the United 

19 States for the benefit of such tribe. 

20 (b) TRUST LAND NOT AFFECTED.—Nothing in this 

21 section shall— 

22 (1) authorize the Confederated Tribes of Coos, 

23 Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians, the Confed24 erated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of 

25 Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians of 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

S 1285 RFH

1 Oregon, the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, 

2 the Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of Indians, 

3 the Klamath Tribes, and the Burns Paiute Tribes to 

4 lease, sell, convey, warrant, or otherwise transfer all 

5 or any part of an interest in any real property that 

6 is held in trust by the United States for the benefit 

7 of such tribe; or 

8 (2) affect the operation of any law governing 

9 leasing, selling, conveying, warranting, or otherwise 

10 transferring any interest in such trust land. 

Passed the Senate November 29, 2017. 

Attest: JULIE E. ADAMS, 

Secretary. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit
31.1



CERTIFICATIONS



I,
Chris A. Wolfe, as Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer), certify that:



1.
I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of I.D. Systems, Inc.;



2.
Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect
to the period covered by this report.



|Date:
    April 30, 2019 | By:    | /s/
    Chris A. Wolfe           
|------------------------ | ------ | ---------------------------------
|                         | Name:  | Chris
    A. Wolfe               
|                         | Title: | Chief
    Executive Officer      
|                         |        | (Principal
    Executive Officer)
# 2018_09 Pivot Table 5A

&"-,Bold"&12&K0000CCMTS Table 5, Reconciliation Support	

# 5

&F	

&A	&P/&N
No. 50401.

#### Protest 97964-K of Italian Furniture Frame Corp. (New York).

*247Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Government contended that inasmuch as there was noncompliance with the regulations governing shortage in unexamined packages (article 813, Customs Regulations of 1937), the importer cannot recover. Under the rulings laid down in *Joseph Dixon Crucible Co.*v. *United States*(14 Cust. Ct. 71. C. D. 914), and Abstract 50268, it was found that the importer’s failure to comply with the regulations does not preclude him from recovery where, as in the instant case, sufficient evidence has been produced to sustain the claim that the merchandise found in excess was enumerated on the invoice of an unexamined case and that duty was paid upon the same. The protest was therefore sustained.
92/, $33(1',; 

1RWH)RUFORVLQJSDFNDJHUHSRUWLQJSXUSRVHVDOO*HQHUDO)XQGDFWLYLW\73$,'PXVWEHUHFODVVLILHGWRDFORVLQJ

SDFNDJHOLQHZLWKLQ5HFLSURFDO&DWHJRULHV



FOR REVIEW PURPOSES ONLY – NOT FINALIZED 

Table 6: Eliminations Summary for Custodial and Non-Entity Transactions

Category Name Reciprocal

Category

Pairing of Eliminating Accounts for Transfers Transactions 

Agency 1–Receiving Agency Agency 2–Collecting Agency 

USSGL Account USSGL Account Title 

USSGL Account 

USSGL Account Title 

Custodial and NonEntity Transactions – 

Other Than the 

General Fund of the 

U.S. Government 

10

Custodial and 

Non-Entity

Liability/Asset

198100F (XXX) Asset for Agency's 

Custodial and NonEntity Liabilities - Other 

Than the General Fund 

of the U.S. Government 

298000F (XXX) 

298500F (XXX) 

Custodial Liability 

Liability for Non-Entity 

Assets Not Reported on 

the Statement of 

Custodial Activity 

 13 

Custodial

Transfers

(Exchange) 

599700FX (XXX) Financing Sources 

Transferred In From 

Custodial Statement 

Collections

599800FX (XXX) Custodial Collections 

Transferred Out to a 

Treasury Account 

Symbol Other Than the 

General Fund of the U.S. 

Government 

 14 

Custodial

Revenues

(Exchange) 

571300FX (XXX) Accrual of Agency 

Amount to be Collected 

- Custodial and NonEntity - Other Than the 

General Fund of the 

U.S. Government 

599000FX (XXX) 

599100FX (XXX) 

Collections for Others–

Statement of Custodial 

Activity

Accrued Collections for 

Others–Statement of 

Custodial Activity 

 15 

Custodial

Transfers (NonExchange) 

599700FE/T (XXX) Financing Sources 

Transferred In From 

Custodial Statement 

Collections

599800FE/T (XXX) Custodial Collections 

Transferred Out to a 

Treasury Account 

Symbol Other Than the 

General Fund of the U.S. 

Government 

16

Custodial

Revenues and 

Non-Entity

Transactions

(Non-Exchange) 

571300FE/T (XXX) Accrual of Agency 

Amount to be Collected 

- Custodial and NonEntity - Other Than the 

General Fund of the 

U.S. Government 

599000FE/T (XXX) 

599100FE/T (XXX) 

599300F (XXX) 

599400F (XXX) 

Collections for Others–

Statement of Custodial 

Activity

Accrued Collections for 

Others–Statement of 

Custodial Activity 

Offset to Non-Entity 

Collections–Statement of 

Changes in Net Position 

Offset to Non-Entity 

Accrued Collections–

Statement of Changes in 

Net Position 

For (NoFo Revie al

ues and 

on-Entity on-Entit

ansactions

view

Exchange Excha

571300FE/ 71300F vie e

-

Cu

Colle

Not d of th

ernment

Financing Sourc Financing Sou

nsferred I nsfer

ialNo FinalizedAssets N

the Stateme Stateme

Custodial Ac ed

X) Custodia Custo

Trans zeTre

d 

nhe 

599000FX (XX 99000FX (XX

5

na Fi
Case No. 6,707.

#### In re HORTON et al.

[5 Ben. 562.] 1

District Court, S. D. New York.

March, 1872.

Bankruptcy — Assignment without Pkeferen-ces — Fraud.

The assignee named in a general assignment executed by a bankrupt without preferences, but in fraud of the bankruptcy act [of 1867 (14 Stat. 517)], is not, although he accepts such assignment, prohibited from proving a debt which he has against the estate, when bankruptcy proceedings have been taken.

[Cited in Re Lloyd, Case No. 8.429.]

[In bankruptcy. In the matter of Joseph H. Horton and others.]

The register in this case certified to the court that an objection had been made before him, by the assignee in bankruptcy, to the proof of debt of Aaron D. Hopping, but that he considered the proof satisfactory, and he

*537BLATCHFORD, District Judge. I concur in the views of the register.
No. 65448.

#### Momoi Co. *v.*United States,

protests 59/29219, etc. (Los Angeles).

*421Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of fish netting similar in all material respects to that involved in Abstract 63947, the merchandise was held dutiable at 25 percent under the provision in paragraph 923, as modified, for cotton fishing nets, by similitude. The items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of synthetic cord or twine similar in all material respects to the component material of the fish nets involved in said Abstract 63947, were held dutiable, depending upon the date of entry, at 33, 31%, or 30 percent under the provision in paragraph 912, as modified, for synthetic cord or twine, similar to cotton cords.
# C_2016296EN.01002102.xml

| 16.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 296/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 296/21

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kúria (Supreme Court, Hungary) lodged on 2 June 2016 — József Lingurár v Miniszterelnökséget vezető miniszter

(Case C-315/16)

(2016/C 296/28)

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:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 42(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 (1) (‘Regulation No 1698/2005’) — also taking into account Article 46 — to be interpreted as not wholly precluding individuals from aid for the sustainable use of forest land where the land is also partly State owned? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 42(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 (1) (‘Regulation No 1698/2005’) — also taking into account Article 46 — to be interpreted as not wholly precluding individuals from aid for the sustainable use of forest land where the land is also partly State owned?

1

| 2. | If aid is not wholly precluded, is Article 46 of Regulation No 1698/2005 to be interpreted as meaning that, in relation to the land concerned — which is partly State owned — the private forester or private owner is entitled to aid in proportion to his share of ownership? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If aid is not wholly precluded, is Article 46 of Regulation No 1698/2005 to be interpreted as meaning that, in relation to the land concerned — which is partly State owned — the private forester or private owner is entitled to aid in proportion to his share of ownership?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2005 L 277, p. 1)

1

---
# sec5_sbr_2019

&"Arial,Bold"&10Bulletin No. 2020-08	&"Arial,Bold"&10V SBR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"&10IRC Meeting Handout 12/5/19
**Exhibit
      10.19**


IEC
      Electronics Corp.


2008
      Management Incentive Plan ("2008 MIP"):





The
      2008
      MIP is a cash incentive plan which links awards to performance results and
      is
      designed to provide cash incentive awards
      ("Awards") to five senior management employees (the "Participants"): Chief
      Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President, Vice
      President of Operations, and Director of Human Resources.





Each
      Participant will be eligible to receive an Award, if any, determined on
      the
      basis of the degree of achievement of certain performance criteria ("Performance
      Goals") applicable to that Participant.
      Performance Goals based upon the following measurements have been established:
      On Time Delivery, Net Income Before Taxes
      and
      Incentives, Sales, and Cash Collection Cycle. From the foregoing and based
      upon
      a Participant's job responsibilities, the Committee
      has assigned a weighting factor to each Performance Goal as it applies to a
      particular Participant. The formula or matrix
      prescribing the extent to which such Participant's Award will be earned based
      upon the level of achievement and the weighting
      of each Performance Goal is set forth on Attachment A.





If
      the
      targets for each of a Participant's Performance Goals are achieved, an Award
      equal to a percentage (varying from 25% to 45% of the Participant's base salary
      will be paid (the "Target Award"). The incentive percentage of a Participant
      is
      based upon position in the Company. Below a threshold level of performance
      ("Plan Entry"), no Awards will be made. If the targets are
      surpassed, Awards will increase depending on the percentage of the targets
      achieved. However, no Award to a Participant may exceed 200% of the Target
      Award.





With
      respect to each Participant, no Award will be payable except upon written
      certification by the Compensation Committee that
      the
      Performance Goals applicable to an individual Participant have been satisfied
      to a particular extent.





Payment
      of any Award to a Participant based upon the degree of attainment of the
      applicable Performance Goals will be made
      within fifteen (15) days after receipt by the Company of the audited financial
      statements for Fiscal 2008. In order to receive
      an Award, a Participant must be an employee of the Company on the date such
      Award is to be distributed.





The
      2008
      MIP is based upon the organic growth of the Company. If any acquisition is
      made
      by the Company in Fiscal 2008, the Compensation Committee will review the impact
      of such acquisition and determine what, if any, changes should be made to the
      2008 MIP.




1
# SF-133 & P&F
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



The undersigned, Maureen D. Howley, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Managing Owner, Preferred Investment Solutions Corp. (the Managing
Owner), of World Monitor Trust  Series B (Series B), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | Series Bs Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 25, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Quarterly
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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Series B.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Maureen D. Howley                            
|Maureen D. Howley                                
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|May 9, 2005
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2005

The undersigned executive officers of the Registrant hereby certify that this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



By:

/s/ David M. MeadowsName:

David M. MeadowsTitle:

Acting PresidentBy:

/s/ Bonnie M. KleinName:

Bonnie M. KleinTitle:

Senior Vice President and Treasurer


Date: August 10, 2006