alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Before the First Division,

October 30, 1946

No.51384.

#### Protest 692263-G of California Milling Co. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

When the case was called for trial the appraiser’s answer to the protest, which described the merchandise as “kelp” in the form of flour, was received in evidence, without objection. It was noted that this description accords with both the invoice description of the merchandise, and the manner in which it was described by the collector in his letter transmitting the protest and accompanying papers to this court. On the record presented and following *Centennial Flouring Mills*v. *United States*(29 C. C. P. A. 264, C. A. D. 200), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1705 was sustained.
(Reap. Dec. 8615)

Entry No. 706635, etc.

#### Ad. M. Schmid & Co. *v.*United States

(Decided June 29, 1956)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn*for the plaintiff.

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

Oliyee, Chief 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 HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the appeals to reappraisement, enumerated in Schedule A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, consist of violin cases and viola cases imported from Germany.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the said appeals to reappraisement are limited to the violin cases appraised at D. M. 11.80 less 3% plus packing and the viola cases appraised at D. M. 14.75 less 3% plus packing.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that on or about the date of exportation of such merchandise to the United States the market value or the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was the invoice unit value.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that on or about the date of exportation such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale for consumption in Germany.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeals to re-appraisement enumerated in Schedule A may be submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that 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 violin cases appraised at DM 11.80, less 3 per centum, plus packing, and the viola cases appraised at DM 14.75, less 3 per centum, plus packing, and that such export values were the invoice unit values.

Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise, they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
From: Wade, Dennis@ARB

To: Ungvarsky, John

Cc: Kalandiyur, Nesamani@ARB; Scheffelin, Thomas@ARB; Tasat, Webster@ARB

Subject: SJV EMFAC2014 for EPA 2015 FSTIP Emissions - Summary.xlsx

Date: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 4:56:28 PM

Attachments: SJV EMFAC2014 for EPA 2015 FSTIP Emissions - Summary.xlsx

John,

        As you requested, the attached spreadsheet contains a summary of EMFAC2014 output for the

SJV for the years and seasons of the submitted budget revisions.

                 Give me a call if you have any questions.

                       Dennis
Before the Second Division,

February 14, 1952

No. 56391.

petition 6850-R (New York).

#### Cathay Crafts Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The petition was dismissed.
# Bulletin No. 2023-02

&"Arial,Bold"&12U.S. Standard General LedgerSummary of Changes	

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2023-02	&"Arial,Bold" &P	&"Arial,Bold"December 2022

# Additional Information

&"Arial,Bold"&12U.S. Standard General LedgerSummary of Changes	

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2023-02	&"Arial,Bold" &P	&"Arial,Bold"December 2022
Printed on 100% recycled/recyclable paper with 100% post

- consumer fiber and process chlorine free.
Customer Service Hotline: 1

- 800

- 438

- 2474 6/29/2014

Mr. David K. Paylor Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

629 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23219

Dear Director Paylor :

On June 23 , 201 4

, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) pertaining to the applicable infrastructure elements for the 2010 sulfur dioxide national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) specified in section 110(a)(2)(A) through (M) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)

. EPA has determined that the submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing the submittal to prepare a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( NP R ) action.

If members of your staff have any questio ns, they may direct them to Ms. Ellen Schmitt , Office of Air Program Planning, at (215) 814

- 5787 , or schmitt.ellen@epa.gov

. She is the principal contact for this rulemaking.

Sincerely,

/s/

Diana Esher, Directo r Air Protection Division

cc: Michael Dowd, Air Division Director Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 89

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:05-cr-00571-LDD Document 10 Filed 03/07/08 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>       THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION
               EXTRACTED FROM  THE QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT  TO SECTION
               13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES  EXCHANGE  ACT  OF 1934 FOR
               THE SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2000.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                   JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                     JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             59,018
<SECURITIES>                                       62,329
<RECEIVABLES>                                      60,572
<ALLOWANCES>                                        4,295
<INVENTORY>                                        19,272
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  220,430
<PP&E>                                             18,594
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    746,307
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              90,356
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                               61
<OTHER-SE>                                        629,950
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      746,307
<SALES>                                            92,019
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   92,019
<CGS>                                              66,500
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      66,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   61,423
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (34,364)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (34,364)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (34,364)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.57)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.57)



</TABLE>
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERROLD LOVE, )

) 2:04-cv-00612-GEB-PAN

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) 

) ORDER

MEDICAL DIRECTOR OF THE HIGH )

DESERT STATE PRISON, MEDICAL )

DIRECTOR OF THE MULE CREEK STATE )

PRISON, and COUNTY OF SHASTA, )

)

Defendants. )

)

On August 26, 2005, Plaintiff’s counsel filed an unnoticed

request in which he seeks to vacate the Status (Pretrial Scheduling)

Order in this action. Plaintiff’s counsel states one of the parties

will oppose the request. Plaintiff’s counsel indicates that the

request has been filed because “the relationship between Plaintiff and

[Plaintiff’s counsel] has deteriorated to the point at which

[Plaintiff] has discharged [counsel].” (Req. at 1.)

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00612-GEB-PAN Document 43 Filed 08/30/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

This conclusory argument is insufficient to show that good

cause justifies changing the Scheduling Order. Therefore, the request

is denied. 

Dated: August 29, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00612-GEB-PAN Document 43 Filed 08/30/05 Page 2 of 2
1

CLD-140 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 13-4314

___________

IN RE: FREDERICK H. BANKS,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania

(Related to Crim. Nos. 04-cr-00176-001 & 03-cr-00245-001)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

December 19, 2013

Before: FUENTES, JORDAN and SHWARTZ, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: January 7, 2014 )

_________

OPINION

_________

PER CURIAM

Frederick Banks has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus requesting that we 

order the District Court to direct a Magistrate Judge to vacate her finding that there was 

probable cause to hold him on a violation of supervised release. He also requests that he 

be released from custody. For the below reasons, we will deny the petition.

In 2005 and 2006, Banks was convicted of mail fraud, criminal copyright 

infringement, money laundering, uttering and possession of a counterfeit or forged 

security, and witness tampering. He was sentenced to 123 months in prison and six years 
2

of supervised release. In May 2013, Banks was released from prison. In October 2013, a 

petition was filed requesting a warrant for Banks’s arrest for violating the terms of his 

supervised release. On October 24, 2013, a Magistrate Judge found that probable cause 

existed to hold Banks. Three days later, Banks filed his mandamus petition.

The writ of mandamus will issue only in extraordinary circumstances. See Sporck 

v. Peil, 759 F.2d 312, 314 (3d Cir. 1985). As a precondition to the issuance of the writ, 

the petitioner must establish that there is no alternative remedy or other adequate means 

to obtain the desired relief, and the petitioner must demonstrate a clear and indisputable 

right to the relief sought. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 403 (1976). A writ is 

not a substitute for an appeal. See In Re Brisco, 448 F.3d 201, 212 (3d Cir. 2006).

On November 25, 2013, after Banks had filed his mandamus petition, the District 

Court found that Banks had violated his supervised release. He was sentenced to 

fourteen months in prison and six months of supervised release. Banks has appealed the 

District Court’s decision. See C.A. No. 13-4594. Because Banks has an alternate 

remedy to challenge the revocation of his supervised release and is, in fact, pursuing that 

remedy, we will deny the mandamus petition.
Before the Third Division,

February 25, 1948

No. 52198.

petitions 6615-R and 6628-R (New York).

#### Durabla Mfg. Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was established without contradiction that there was a legitimate difference of opinion as to the proper value of the gauge glasses for dutiable purposes. It was found that in entering the merchandise the petitioner made full and candid disclosures to the customs officials of all the facts in its possession and that there was no intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed November 10, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D22-59 Lower Tribunal No. F20-12118

________________ 

### Jason A. Johnson, Appellant, vs. 

### The State of Florida, Appellee. An appeal conducted pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lody Jean, Judge. Jason A. Johnson, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee. Before LOGUE, SCALES, and HENDON, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
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 No. 1 for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Wayne L. Schoonmaker, Principal Accounting 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:  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.  /s/ Wayne L. Schoonmaker Principal Accounting Officer  Dated: October 20, 2006
# Data

&L&"Arial"&10&BBulletin No. 2021-12	&"Arial,Bold"VII VSR - &P	&R&"Arial"&10&BMarch 2021
Exhibit 32.2
 
 Statement of Chief Financial Officer Furnished
 Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  
 The undersigned, Gary F. Hoskins, is the Chief Financial Officer of Citizens South Banking Corporation (the “Company”).
 
 This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the “Report”).
 
 By execution of this statement, I certify that to the best of my knowledge:
 
 A)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and
 
 B)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods covered by the Report.
 
 May 17, 2010
/s/ Gary F. HoskinsDated
Gary F. HoskinsChief Financial Officer
  This statement is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.  It is not intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
 
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Citizens South Banking Corporation and will be retained by Citizens South Banking Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# Budgetary Bal Sheet

DRAFT	

DRAFT	&P of &N	IRC Handout July 20, 2017

# Footnotes

DRAFT	

DRAFT	&P of &N	IRC Handout July 20, 2017
No. 54594.

#### Kittay & Blitz *v.*United States,

protests 122940-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of *S. Nathan & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.
DRAFT		IV 	IRC Handout December 5, 2019
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 13 , 2019

.

In The


## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14- 19 -00063- CV

BONG-BONG TINIO CENTENO, Appellant

V.

EDEN G. CENTENO, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 3

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1124120

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed January 16, 2019 . The clerk’s

record was filed April 5, 2019

. The reporter’s record was filed March 26, 2019. No

brief was filed.

On May 14, 2019 , this court issued an order stating that unless appellant

filed a brief on or before June 5, 201 9 , the court would dismiss the a ppeal for want
of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P . 42.3(b).2

Appellant filed no brief. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Hassan.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

TRINA HERRING, et al.

v.

MICHAEL MCCREA, et al.

: CIVIL ACTION 

:

: NO. 02-CV-4391

:

:

ORDER

AND NOW, this______day of January, 2003, upon consideration of Plaintiffs’

unopposed request for a Continuance of Arbitration, IT IS ORDERED that the Arbitration

previously scheduled for January 14, 2003 shall be continued until February, 3 2003. 

BY THE COURT:

 

BRUCE W. KAUFFMAN, J.

Case 2:02-cv-04391-BWK Document 8 Filed 01/14/2003 Page 1 of 1
22.02 Process a Card Payment - Manual Card Payment
# Month

# image1.jpg
#### Ronnie Clearace HEADEN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 01-6210.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 12, 2001.

Decided April 19, 2001.

Ronnie Clearace Headen, pro se. Richard Bain Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, VA, for appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Ronnie C. Headen seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s * order denying relief *131on Ms petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge’s opimon and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Headen’s motion for appointment of counsel on appeal, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal on the reasonmg of the magistrate judge. *See Headen v. An-gelone,*No. CA-00-672-2 (E.D.Va. Jan. 23, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*

*

 The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(c) (West 1993 & Supp.2000).
No. 51350.

#### Protests 34546-K, etc., of National Truss Co. et al. (Cleveland, etc.).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136941 & (15)(16)(17) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. MENTOR TOWNSHIP, Stephen J. Markman, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 136941 

 COA: 283469 

Oscoda CC: 06-004028-CE 

GENE HOY, 

Defendant-Appellant, 

and 

FLASKA PROPERTIES, LLC, 

Defendant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED. 

The application for leave to appeal the July 3, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is 

considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented 

should be reviewed by this Court. The motion for stay and motion for miscellaneous 

relief are DENIED. 

p0915 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 22, 2008 

 Clerk
No. 56388.

protest 175220-K (New York).

#### Anglo French Laboratories, Inc. *v.*United States,

*399Opinion by

Johnson, J.

From an examination of the papers in the case the court was unable to find anything to overcome the presumption of correctness of the collector’s classification. The protest was therefore overruled.
Exhibit 23.2

Consent of Independent Engineers

We refer to our report auditing estimates of the natural gas,
natural gas liquids and conventional oil reserves attributable to Husky Energy Inc. (the Company) as of December 31, 2008 (the Report).

We hereby consent to references to our name in the Companys Annual Report on Form 40-F to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and the Companys registration statement on Form F-9 (File No. 333-137211). We also confirm that we have read the Companys Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2008, dated February 18, 2009,
and that we have no reason to believe that there are any misrepresentations in the information contained in it that was derived from the Report or that is within our knowledge as a result of the services we performed in connection with such Report.

Sincerely,

McDaniel & Associates Consultants
Ltd.



|                             
|-----------------------------
|/S/    P. A.
WELCH           
|P. A. Welch                  
|President & Managing Director
|Calgary, Alberta,
Canada     
|February 18, 2009