alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 10389)

Entry No. 34089, etc.

#### New York Merchandise Co. et al. *v.*United States

(Decided December 4, 1962)

*Stein & Shostalc*for the plaintiffs.

*Joseph D. Guilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

JOHNSON, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement enumerated on the attached Schedule, attached hereto and made a part hereof, consists of wooden and bamboo blinds, shutters, etc., manufactured by Toyo Mokko K. K., and exported from Japan.

> That all the merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement except the merchandise covered by D.E. 37026, the subject of R59/12013-20987, and by D.E. 34847, the subject of R61/16777-29311, was entered before February 27, 1958.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the merchandise the subject of the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule is not included on the list of articles designated by the Secretary of the Treasury in T.D. 54521, as provided for in Section 6(a) of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, P'ublic Law 927, 84th Congress, required to be valued in accordance with Section 402(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that at the time of exportation of the instant merchandise to the United States, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for export 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, were the invoiced unit values, net packed, and that with respect to the merchandise covered by Re-appraisements R58/28453-17719, R58/28652-17663, R59/3944-18333 and R60/ 4382-23121, imported prior to February 28, 1958, there were no higher foreign values for such or similar merchandise at the time of exportation.

> *476IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that these appeals for re-appraisement may be deemed submitted for decision on this stipulation.

Beappraisement Nos. B59/12013 and E61/16777, referred to above, have been deleted from the appeals listed in the schedule attached to the stipulation. The merchandise covered by the appeals now before the court was all entered prior to February 27, 1958, and is subject to appraisement under the Tariff Act of 1930.

On the agreed facts, I find that the export value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise involved herein and that such value is represented by the invoiced unit values, net, packed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 49638.

#### Protest 935129-G of John G. Barnett Co. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

At the hearing it was found that it was the duty of the collector to transmit the protest to this court in order that the importer might have the benefit of a hearing and produce proof of his authority. Following *United Bulb Co.*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 78, C. D. 431) and *Rhodes*v. *United*
      *264
      *States*(7 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 528] cited by plaintiff, the protest was sustained, and the court held that the original protest should be forwarded to this court in order that plaintiff may obtain a judicial ruling. T. D. 50565, amending article 849 (a), Customs Regulations of 1937, promulgated subsequent to the collector’s refusal to accept the protest, noted.
SAR Comparisons

We have chosen to submit data available for a surrogate substance.

Test data was completed on a coco fatty acid derived material (Berol R648, Ethoquad 

IMC1214/25, Ethoquad MC1214/25). The PMN chemical substance is manufactured with a 

new process, synthesis starting from a synthetic C12-14 fatty alcohol but the resulting 

chemistry is similar. Coco has alkyl chains that are primarily C12 and C14.

 

Figure 1 Figure 2
CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 8/29/2023 1

Overseas Absentee Ballot Consent Decree 

in the Virgin Islands 

United States v. Virgin Islands 

(Curtis V. Gómez, D.V.I. 3:12-cv-69) 

Eight days before a primary election, the government sought a consent decree on overseas absentee ballots, which had not been sent to 

overseas voters in time. 

Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Uniformed and 

Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA); absentee 

ballots. 

On August 31, 2012, the Justice Department filed a federal complaint in the 

District of the Virgin Islands1 to enforce the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act of 1986 (UOCAVA),2

 as amended by the Military 

and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act of 2009 (MOVE Act).3

 According to 

the complaint, for the Saturday, September 8, primary election for the Virgin 

Islands’ delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives the Virgin Islands 

failed to transmit absentee ballots to overseas voters forty-five days before 

the election, and Virgin Islands election procedures would not result in the 

timely transmission of general-election absentee ballots either.4

 With its 

complaint, the Justice Department filed a joint motion for an expedited consent decree.5

 The court set a hearing for September 5 before Judge Curtis V. 

Gómez.6

Judge Gómez signed the consent decree on September 7.7

 The decree 

specified express mail and email voting options and extended the deadlines 

for receipt of overseas absentee ballots.8

1. Complaint, United States v. Virgin Islands, No. 3:12-cv-69 (D.V.I. Aug. 31, 2012), 

D.E. 1. 

2. Pub. L. No. 99-410, 100 Stat. 924, as amended, 52 U.S.C. §§ 20301–20311. See generally

Robert Timothy Reagan, Overseas Voting: The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee 

Voting Act (Federal Judicial Center 2016). 

3. National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-84, 123 Stat. 

2190, 2318–35. 

4. Complaint, supra note 1. 

5. Consent-Decree Motion, United States v. Virgin Islands, No. 3:12-cv-69 (D.V.I. Aug. 

31, 2012), D.E. 2. 

6. Docket Sheet, id. (Aug. 31, 2012). 

Judge Gómez was replaced by Judge Robert Molloy in 2020. See Judicial Milestones, 

www.uscourts.gov/judicial-milestones/robert-molloy; Suzanne Carlson, AG: 17-Year-Old 

VLT Contract Was Never Legal, V.I. Daily News, May 12, 2020; Suzanne Carlson, Judge Robert Molloy Confirmed to District Court, V.I. Daily News, Feb. 26, 2020. 

7. Consent Decree, United States v. Virgin Islands, No. 3:12-cv-69 (D.V.I. Sept. 7, 2012), 

D.E. 10; see Reagan, supra note 2, at 20–21; Elections Accepts Consent Decree on Absentees, 

St. Croix Source, Sept. 5, 2012. 

8. Consent Decree, supra note 7.
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 1SUPPLEMENT &"Arial,Regular"	&"Arial,Bold"&16&KFF0000DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2020 ReportingSection VII  &"Arial,Regular"

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2020-15	&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000DRAFT&K000000 VII CER - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 4/23/20
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 March 31, 2005 In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K by Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, a
Delaware corporation (the Company), for the year ending December 31, 2003 (the Report), as
filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the undersigned, John T. La
Duc, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to such officers
knowledge:  (1)
    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 or 78o(d)); and(2)
    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 expressed in the Report. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the date first above
written. /s/ Kerry A. ShibaKerry A. ShibaChief Financial Officer A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Kaiser
Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and will be retained by Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 Husky Energy Inc. (the Company) on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2015 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Asim Ghosh, President & Chief Executive 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: February 26, 2016

/s/ Asim Ghosh

Asim Ghosh

President & Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION,

 et. al.,

CIV S-04-0778 MCE KJM

Plaintiffs,

 v.

BILL LOCKER, et. al,

Defendants. .

XX -- Decision by the Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues

have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

THAT JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE COURT'S ORDER OF OCTOBER 4, 2004.

Jack L. Wagner,

Clerk of the Court

ENTERED: October 4, 2005

by:_/s/ M. Krueger_______

 M. Krueger, Deputy Clerk

FILED

October 4, 2005

CLERK, US DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA

DEPUTY CLERK

Case 2:04-cv-00778-MCE -KJM Document 70 Filed 10/04/05 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                           UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE DECEMBER 31,
1998 FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE INTERSTATE ENERGY  CORPORATION'S FORM
10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000352541
<NAME>                        INTERSTATE ENERGY CORPOPRATION

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                   PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      3,101,680
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    1,024,841
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         387,960
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       103,172
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                 341,684
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4,959,337
<COMMON>                                       776
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      905,130
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            700,389 <F1>
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 1,606,295
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          24,396
<PREFERRED>                                    89,102
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           1,543,131
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                             51,784
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                      56,975
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 64,500
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  63,414
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                      0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                    13,755
<LEASES-CURRENT>                               11,978
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 1,434,007
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  4,959,337
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      2,130,874
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           58,113 <F2>
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     1,847,572
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     1,847,572 <F2>
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        283,302
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                             7,548
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 290,850
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       129,363
<NET-INCOME>                                   103,374
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                    6,699
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  96,675
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       140,679
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      95,551
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         467,762 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.26    
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.26    
<FN>
<F1> Includes $163,017 of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income.
<F2> Income tax expense is not included in Operating Expense in the Consolidated
Statements of Income
</FN>
                                               


</TABLE>
# C_2016326EN.01001801.xml

| 5.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/18

---

Appeal brought on 19 July 2016 by the Federal Republic of Germany against the judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 10 May 2016 in Case T-47/15, Federal Republic of Germany v European Commission

(Case C-405/16 P)

(2016/C 326/30)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and R. Kanitz, Agents, assisted by T. Lübbig, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission

Other party to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The Federal Republic of Germany claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside, in its entirety, the judgment under appeal of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 10 May 2016 in Case T-47/15; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside, in its entirety, the judgment under appeal of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 10 May 2016 in Case T-47/15;

| — | order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

Grounds of appeal and main arguments

The appeal is based on three grounds of appeal:

1. First ground of appeal

The judgment of the General Court under appeal failed to have regard for the limits of the definition of aid under Article 107(1) TFEU in the interpretation of ‘State resources’ and State ‘control’ over the financial resources of private undertakings. The judgment under appeal wrongly assumes that ‘authorities’ of the Federal Republic of Germany, on the basis of the requirements of the German Renewable Energy Law, exercise ‘control’, and therefore administrative power, over the financial means of transmission system operators and energy supply undertakings integrated into the existing system in Germany for promoting renewable energies. The General Court ought properly to have recognised that the Renewable Energy Law creates solely private-law contractual relations between single undertakings in the German energy market but establishes no State control over the financial means of those undertakings.

2. Second ground of appeal

The appellant criticises the General Court for having wrongly held that the German Renewable Energy Law provides an advantage amounting to aid to energy-intensive undertakings as final consumers. In so holding, the General Court failed to have regard for the case-law relating to structural disadvantages and also to the criterion of the selectivity of aid.

3. Third ground of appeal

Finally, the appellant complains of insufficient reasoning in the judgment with regard to the positions of both transmission systems operators and energy supply undertakings.

---
11.01
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-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 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
      Financial Officer
                May
      20, 2008
<Page 43>
Exhibit 11 (a)					
					
					
					
IRWIN FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES				
EXHIBIT 11(a) - COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE			
					
				
     Year Ended December 31,	       1995	       1994	        1993
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
PRIMARY SHARES OUTSTANDING:					
					
<S>                              <C>           <C>           <C>
  Average number of shares
   outstanding 	                   5,639,935	    5,773,517  	  5,772,553
  Assumed exercise of
   stock options	                    103,193  	    109,589	       87,138
                                	-----------  	-----------  	-----------
  Total shares	                    5,743,128	    5,883,106	    5,859,691
                                	===========  	===========  	===========
				
NET INCOME                      	$20,083,202	  $18,215,539  	$15,588,361
                                	===========  	===========  	===========
				
PRIMARY EARNINGS PER SHARE      	      $3.50	      $3.10	      $2.66
                                	      =====	      =====	      =====
				
FULLY DILUTED SHARES OUTSTANDING:			
				
  Average number of shares
   outstanding                  	  5,639,935     5,773,517	   5,772,553
  Assumed exercise of stock
   options (Note 1)	                 116,470	      117,303	      90,053
                                 	----------- 	----------- 	-----------
  Total shares	                    5,756,405     5,890,820	   5,862,606
                                	===========  	=========== 	===========
				
NET INCOME                      	$20,083,202  	$18,215,539 	$15,588,361
                                	===========  	=========== 	===========
FULLY DILUTED EARNINGS
PER SHARE 	                            $3.49	       $3.09	      $2.66
	                                      =====	       =====	      =====
</TABLE>
					
(1)  The dilutive effect of stock options is based on the Treasury Stock
     method using the higher of the average market price for the year or 
     the year-end market price.
exv10w42







Exhibit 10.42




July 14, 2008




Via Email

Gary Evans

Investment Hunter LLC

1048 Texan Trail

Grapevine, Texas 76051




	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Re:
	 	Notice of Extension

Convertible Promissory Note dated March 1, 2008

Investment Hunter, LLC






Dear Mr. Evans



Pursuant to paragraph “3” of the aforementioned promissory note, Ecology Coatings (the “Company)
does hereby elect to extend the term of the note until June 30, 2008. In connection therewith, the
Company has issued Investment Hunter LLC an option to purchase Fifteen Thousand (15,000) shares of
the Company’s common stock. That option grant is included herein for your review and consideration.
Please execute and return at your earliest convenience.




Thank you for your time in addressing this matter.




Yours very truly,




Adam S. Tracy, Esq.

Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary




cc




Richard D. Stromback




enc (1)
Jonathan B. Hill

202/776

- 2725

jhill@cooley.com

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM June 3 , 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: FAA

- Docket 2015

- 0513 Supplement to Application/Amendment filed ________

Dear Sir or Madam:

Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Liberty Mutual”) hereby files the attached confidential

manual submitted to support its May 13, 2015 amendment to its Section 333 exemption request.

1. “Liberty 3”

This manual was not f iled with the original submission of the Supplemental

Application/Amendment. With this submission the FAA has manual s for each of the additional

aircraft that Liberty Mutual proposes to operate under the exemption when granted.

Liberty Mutual requests that th is manual be maintained in confidence and not placed in the

public docket or otherwise disclosed to the public. As the information included in the manual

includes trade secrets and commercial information that is confidential and not made available to

th e public, it is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)

and 14 C.F.R. Part 11. Should the FAA receive a request for access to these manual s , we

would request notification of such request prior to any action being tak en by the FAA, as it may

relate to the request.

Should you or your staff have any questions, please contact the undersigned.

Sincerely,

Jonathan B. Hill

M. Anne Swanson

Cooley LLP

Counsel for Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

EnclosuresJames H. Williams

June 3, 2015

Page Two

1299 PENNSYLVANIA AV ENUE, NW, SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20004

- 2400 T: (202) 842

- 7800 F: (202) 842

- 7899 WWW.COOLEY.COM cc: William Cozier

Robert Pappas

Jake Troutman

Dean Griffith

Thuy H. Cooper

# Exhibit 1

(Confidential)
Lot # 1772-1 820 

Date 2013-0 7-30 

For R&D Use Only-