alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

 

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, 

LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; and 

BLACKWATER LODGE AND TRAINING 

CENTER, INC. a Delaware Corporation, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES 

INSURANCE COMPANY, a Georgia 

Corporation; EVANSTON INSURANCE 

COMPANY, an Illinois Corporation; FIDELITY 

AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, 

a South Carolina Corporation; and LIBERTY 

INSURANCE UNDERWRITERS, a 

Massachusetts Corporation, 

 

 Defendants. 

 

 

Civil Action No. 05 6020 

Assigned to Judge Petrese B. Tucker 

 

 

ORDER 

AND NOW, this _____ day of _____________________, 2007, upon consideration of 

Plaintiffs Blackwater Security Consulting, LLC and Blackwater Lodge and Training Center, 

Inc.’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Duty to Defend against Evanston Insurance 

Company (“Evanston”) and Evanston’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment, the Court has 

considered the motions and all papers filed in support and opposition of each motion, the 

arguments of the parties, and all other pertinent matters. For the reasons outlined in Evanston’s 

papers, Evanston is entitled to a declaratory judgment that it has no duty to defend or indemnify 

Plaintiffs in connection with the action captioned Nordan v. Blackwater Security Consulting 

LLC, et al., 05 CVS 000173. Because Evanston has no duty to defend or indemnify, it has not 

Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 58-2 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 1 of 2

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 58 Att. 1

Dockets.Justia.com
2

breached its contract with Blackwater. For this reason, Blackwater’s claim under the 

Pennsylvania bad faith statute, 42 Pa. C.S.A. §8371 fails as a matter of law. 

THEREFORE, 

It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant Evanston Insurance Company’s Motion for 

Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and that Plaintiffs Blackwater Security Consulting, LLC and 

Blackwater Lodge and Training Center, Inc.’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment On The 

Duty To Defend Against Evanston Insurance Company is DENIED. 

THE HONORABLE PETRESE B. TUCKER 

Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 58-2 Filed 08/10/2007 Page 2 of 2
Before the First Division,

August 9, 1950

No. 54592.

#### —

#### S. Nathan & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 122061-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that thé 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.
To: Amy Lamson/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

From: "King, Heidi R." <Heidi_R._King@omb.eop.gov>

Date: 01/20/2010 05:47PM

cc: Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Kathy Kaufman/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject: RE: NO2 NAAQS RIA

Thanks, Amy, this is great and I appreciate your sharp eye.

Best regards,

heidi

From: Lamson.Amy@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Lamson.Amy@epamail.epa.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 5:46 PM

To: King, Heidi R.

Cc: Evans.Ron@epamail.epa.gov; Kaufman.Kathy@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: NO2 NAAQS RIA

Hi, Heidi.

While cleaning up the track changes in the NO2 NAAQS RIA, we found some boilerplate 

language in Chapter 1 (page 1-8) that has not been updated in the past several RIAs. Since you 

haven't seen this revision, Ron asked me to forward this revised language to you. We presume 

that this will be a non-controversial revision. 

Original:

To streamline this RIA, this document refers to several previously published documents, 

including three technical documents EPA produced to prepare for promulgation of the 

NO2 NAAQS. The first was a Criteria Document created by EPA’s Office of Research and 

Development (published in 2007), which presented the latest available pertinent 

information on atmospheric science, air quality, exposure, health effects, and 

environmental effects of NO2. The second was an Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) 

published in 2008 that evaluated the policy implications of the key studies and scientific 

information contained in the Criteria Document. The third was a risk and exposure 

assessment (REA) for various standard levels. The REA also includes staff conclusions 

and recommendations to the Administrator regarding potential revisions to the 

standards. 
Revised:

To streamline this RIA, this document refers to several previously published documents, including two 

technical documents EPA produced to prepare for promulgation of the NO2 NAAQS. The first was the 

Integrated Science Assessment created by EPA’s Office of Research and Development (U.S. EPA, 2007), 

which presented the latest available pertinent information on atmospheric science, air quality, exposure, 

health effects, and environmental effects of NO2. The second was a risk and exposure assessment (REA) 

(U.S. EPA, 2008) for various standard levels. The REA also includes staff conclusions and recommendations 

to the Administrator regarding potential revisions to the standards. 

Thanks!

Amy Lamson

Air Benefit and Cost Group

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

US Environmental Protection Agency

109 TW Alexander Dr. (C439-02)

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone: (919) 541-4383

Fax: (919) 541-0839
Part 2, Section VI: USSGL Crosswalks to Reclassified

Statements

This section includes crosswalks for use in fiscal 2018 GTAS Reporting. These crosswalks map USSGL

accounts to external reports in accordance with TFM Volume I, Part 2, Chapter 4700, Agency Reporting

Requirements for the Financial Report of the United States Government. Each report crosswalk lists the

proper USSGL accounts and applicable attributes for each line and/or column on the reports. Attributes

identify information subsidiary to the basic 6-digit USSGL accounts. This subsidiary information is

necessary to meet external reporting requirements. See Section IV for additional information on attributes.

The following are crosswalks from the USSGL Chart of Accounts to standard external reports required by

Fiscal Service:

Section VI Page Number

USSGL Crosswalk Reclassified Balance Sheet (RBS) VI RBS - 1

USSGL Crosswalk Reclassified Statement of Net Cost (RSNC) VI RSNC - 1

USSGL Crosswalk Reclassified Statement of Operations and

Changes in Net Position (RSOCNP)

VI RSOCNP - 1 

 

Page 1 of 1
#### William Obdulio MARTINEZ-PERDOMO, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

No. 00-71270.

INS No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*597Submitted June 11, 2001.*

Decided June 25, 2001.

Before O’SCANNLAIN, SILVERMAN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

William Obdulio Martinez-Perdomo, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of a final order of deportation entered by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) on September 11, 2000. The facts and prior proceedings are known to the parties; they are not restated herein except as necessary.

The BIA dismissed Martinez-Perdomo’s appeal from an order of an Immigration Judge denying his application for asylum and withholding of deportation on the ground that he failed to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of his political opinion.

There is no evidence that Martinez-Perdomo’s grandmother and aunt’s employment as laundresses for the Salvadoran military caused the guerillas to impute a political opinion to him. Nor is there any evidence that the guerillas ever harmed or threatened Martinez-Perdomo or his family. The guerillas’ mere questioning of Martinez-Perdomo’s grandmother does not rise to the level of persecution. *Khourassany v. INS,*208 F.3d 1096, 1100-01 (9th Cir.2000) (detention and questioning by police does not constitute persecution). Indeed, at his hearing before the Immigration Judge, Martinez-Perdomo testified that his grandmother continued to reside openly and unharmed in San Miguel. Thus, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Martinez-Perdomo’s fear of future persecution lacks an objective basis. *See Pedro-Mateo v. INS,*224 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring, under the substantial evidence standard, affirmance of the BIA unless the evidence compels reversal); *Aruta v. INS,**59880 F.3d 1389, 1392, 1395 (9th Cir.1996) (affirming BIA’s denial of asylum where petitioner had never been “directly or indirectly the victim of any threat, or of any acts of aggression, harassment, or persecution,” and where petitioner’s sister continued to reside “openly and continuously in ... the same zone of danger”).

Because Martinez-Perdomo has not established eligibility for asylum, he necessarily fails to establish eligibility for withholding of deportation. *Pedro-Mateo,*224 F.3d at 1150.

PETITION DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 10.17

NOTE EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION AGREEMENT

THIS NOTE AND EXTENSION MODIFICATION AGREEMENT
(Agreement) is entered into by and between JILCO INDUSTRIES, INC., a California corporation (Payor) and LEONARD M. ROSS, a California resident (Payee).

Payor and Payee do hereby mutually acknowledge and agree that Payor is presently liable for the indebtedness represented by a certain promissory note
payable to Payee dated December 18, 1987 in the original principal amount of FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($40,000.00) (Note) with interest accruing on the unpaid principal balance at the rate of 9% per year. Payor and Payee
previously agreed to extend the initial maturity date of December 31, 1989 to December 31, 1991 and subsequently agreed to extend the second maturity date of December 31, 1991 to December 31, 1994. Said Note was not paid on
December 31, 1994 and interest on the unpaid principal balance has continued to accrue through July 31, 2006. Payor has requested Payee to again extend the maturity date of said Note and Payor is willing to do so.

NOW, THEREFORE, FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION IN HAND

RECEIVED, the parties hereto, and each of them, do hereby agree that as of the date hereof, the unpaid principal portion of the Note and all unpaid accrued interest, if any, shall be all due and payable on July 31, 2007.

Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to affect the obligation of Payor regarding the payment of interest accrued on the Note through the date hereof,
or to affect any obligations of Payor under the Note, except as set forth herein.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, and each of
them, have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth below but effective as of the 31st day of December, 1994.



|                          |  |                          |  |                        |  | 
|------------------------- |  | ------------------------ |  | ---------------------- |  | 
|                          |  | JILCO INDUSTRIES, INC.   |  |                       
|                          |  | a California corporation |  |                       
|                          |  |                          | 
|Date:    August  29, 2006 |  | By:                      |  | /s/ Martha J. Kretzmer |  | 
|                          |  | Martha J. Kretzmer       |  |                       
|                          |  | President                |  |                       
|                          |  | Payor                  |  |                       
|                          |  |                          | 
|Date:    August  29, 2006 |  | By:                      |  | /s/ Leonard M. Ross    |  | 
|                          |  | Leonard M. Ross          |  |                       
|                          |  | Payee                  |  |
Before the First Division,

April 15, 1953

No. 57257.

protest 173274-K (New York).

#### Luxemberg *v.*United States,

*420Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of plain metal belt buckles, composed in chief value of brass, primarily used on belts to hold up trousers for men; that they are required by men in the armed forces as an-essential part of their vocational uniform and are not incidental articles of mere personal comfort, convenience, or adornment; and that the cases of *Weyenberg Shoe Mfg. Co.*v. *United States (38 C. C.*P. A. 122, C. A. D. 448) and Abstract 51825 involved similar issues. On the agreed facts and following the cited eases, the claim of the plaintiff 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 Annual Report of Ingles Markets, Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending September 30, 2006
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald B. Freeman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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 result of operations of
the Company.



A signed original of this written statement
required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|                                                                                         
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/S/    RONALD B. FREEMAN                                                                 
|Ronald B. Freeman Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer  December 1, 2006
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    Certification of Chief Financial Officer

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Getty Realty Corp.(the
"Company") hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

      (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended; and

      (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

   Dated: May 9, 2005            BY: /s/ Thomas J. Stirnweis
                                     -----------------------
                                            (Signature)
                                     THOMAS J. STIRNWEIS
                                     Vice President, Treasurer and
                                      Chief Financial Officer

      A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Getty Realty Corp. and will be retained by Getty Realty Corp.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

      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.
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

IN RE:

SUNTERRA CORPORATION,

NO. 2:04-cv-0784-MCE-PAN (JFM)

DEBTORS,

__________________________

SUNTERRA CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

PERINI BUILDING COMPANY, INC.

Defendant.

___________________________

AND RELATED CROSS ACTIONS.

----oo0oo----

//

//

//

Case 2:04-cv-00784-MCE -EFB Document 70 Filed 04/28/06 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

While Perini’s Motion is denominated as a request for leave 1

to file a “Third Party Complaint”, the simultaneously filed

Declaration of Heidi A. Trant, which includes a copy of the

proposed amended pleading, makes it clear that the pleading for

which amendment is sought is in fact a Third Party Cross-Claim.

Because oral argument will not be of material assistance, 2

the Court orders this matter submitted on the briefs. E.D. Cal.

Local Rule 78-230(h).

2

Defendant Perini Building Company, Inc. (“Perini”) moves for

leave to amend its Third Party Cross-Claim, pursuant to Federal 1

Rule of Civil Procedure 13 and 15(a), on grounds that three

additional subcontractors have recently been identified through

discovery which should be included as cross defendants. Leave to

amend a party’s pleadings should generally be freely given under

Rule 15(a), and no opposition to Perini’s Motion has been made. 

Consequently, good cause appearing therefor, Perini’s Motion for

Leave to File an Amended Third Party Cross-Claim is GRANTED.2

Perini shall file and serve its First Amended Cross-Claim not

later than ten (10) days following the date of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 28, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-00784-MCE -EFB Document 70 Filed 04/28/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 46098.

#### Protests 913770-G, etc., of H. N. Brown Brokerage Co. et al. (Denver, etc.).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
December 8, 1953

No. 57681.

#### Modern Food Products Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 191724-K, etc.

C. D. 1556. Motion of Government for rehearing denied.
No. 56400.

protests 164755-K, etc. (New York).

#### Sig Dawer Import Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 53512.

protests 3599-K/88695, etc. (Chicago).

#### Carson, Pirie, Scott & Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
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 Welwind Energy International Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2007, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Tammy-Lynn McNabb, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:
 
 (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/ 
      Tammy Lynn McNabbTammy
      Lynn McNabb,
                Principal
      Executive Officer
                April
      4, 2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                            9
<LEGEND>
                         This schedule contains summary financial information
                         extracted from Form 10-QSB for the period ended
                         September 30, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by
                         reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-2000
<CASH>                                         763
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         27
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               497
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    3,329
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         500
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           495
<LOANS>                                        8,777
<ALLOWANCE>                                    113
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 15,839
<DEPOSITS>                                     11,615
<SHORT-TERM>                                   0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            236
<LONG-TERM>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       5
<OTHER-SE>                                     3,983
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 15,839
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                458
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              144
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               63
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               665
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             302
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             303
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          362
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  75
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                690
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (343)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     (213)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (213)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.41)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 4.0
<LOANS-NON>                                    0
<LOANS-PAST>                                   0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               42
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  4
<RECOVERIES>                                   0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              113
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           113
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        0



</TABLE>
**Part 1, Section VII: GTAS Validations and Edits**

One of the goals the Bureau of the Fiscal Service (Fiscal Service) has envisioned for GTAS is to improve the consistency in agency trial balance reporting. This will be accomplished through validations and edits.

The validations ensure that the attributes reported in agencies’ GTAS trial balance submissions are valid for the USSGL account. The validations encompass both USSGL level attributes per the USSGL Attribute Table and Treasury Account Symbol (TAS) level attributes found in the Super Master Account (SMAF).

Simple validations are those involving one attribute while special validations involve more than one attribute. All validations are fatal.

The edits compare the agency trial balances with USSGL rules and with data from authoritative sources such as the Central Accounting Reporting System (CARS), Fiscal Service, and the Federal Financing Bank. The edits may be either fatal or proposed. Fiscal Service will use the proposed edits only for analytical purposes. Fiscal Service disclaims any role or responsibility with the agency auditor relationship concerning the GTAS fatal and proposed analytical edits.

The following are the validation and edit reports included in this section:

Page 1 of 1

# image1.png
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 2SUPPLEMENT		&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2023 ReportingSection VII

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2022-16	&"Arial,Bold"VII VDR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"September 2022