alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 8651)

Entry No. 903114, etc.

#### Joseph Markovits, Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided September 14, 1956)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn*for the plaintiff.

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

Wilson, Judge:

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

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto

> That the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in Schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, cover artificial flowers, fruits, leaves, stems or parts thereof, or articles wholly or in chief value of the same imported from Japan.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the market value or the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States was as follows:

> 1.

> Artificial flowers, fruits, leaves, stems, or parts thereof wholly or in chief value of threads, filaments or yarn and articles wholly or in chief value of the forgoing. Appraised value, less 3% packing included.

> 2. Artificial flowers, fruits, leaves, stems, and parts thereof wholly or in chief value of materials other than threads, filaments or yarn and articles wholly or in chief value of the Appraised value, less 5% included.

> That on or about the date of exportation such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale for home consumption in Japan.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that these cases 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 merchandise here involved, and that such values were as follows:

> *5101. Artificial flowers, fruits, leaves, stems, or parts thereof, wholly or in chief value of threads, filaments, or yarn, and articles wholly or in chief value of the foregoing_ Appraised value, less 3 % packing included.

> 2. Artificial flowers, fruits, leaves, stems, and parts thereof, wholly or in chief value of materials other than threads, filaments, or yarn, and articles, wholly or in chief value of the foregoing_ Appraised value, less *5%*packing included.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 23.1


              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our report dated August 23, 2000, accompanying the
consolidated financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report
of K-tel International, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2000.
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the
Registration Statements of K-tel International, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No.
33-18723 effective November 25, 1987), (File No. 333-28815 effective June 5,
1997), (File No. 333-65755 effective October 6, 1998), (File No. 333-74471
effective March 12, 1999), (File No. 333-31272 effective February 28, 2000),
and (File No. 333-39022 effective June 9, 2000) and on Form S-3 (File No.
333-79933 effective June 3, 1999).



                                    /S/ GRANT THORNTON LLP


Minneapolis, Minnesota
September 28, 2000

                                       44
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF EUROPEAN
MICRO HOLDINGS, INC. AND THE NOTES THERETO SET FORTH IN THE PROSPECTUS.  THIS
INFORMATION IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERECE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
INFORMATION.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                             613
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    11828
<ALLOWANCES>                                        20
<INVENTORY>                                       4037
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 19082
<PP&E>                                             599
<DEPRECIATION>                                     434
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   19893
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            14219
<BONDS>                                             84
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            40
<OTHER-SE>                                        5550
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     19893
<SALES>                                          39130
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 39130
<CGS>                                            32549
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2873
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (50)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 117
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   3593
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1213
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2380
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0.595
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.595
        


</TABLE>
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-23-00009-CR

No. 10-23-00010-CR

CHRISTOPHER SPEARS,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 361st District Court

Brazos County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 12-02809-CRM-361 and 

12-05062-CRF-361

MEMORANDUM OPINION

These appeals were referred to mediation on February 2, 2023, and by that referral, 

the appeals were suspended. Appellant has now filed an Unopposed Motion to 

Voluntarily Dismiss Appeal in both appeals asserting that the parties have reached a premediation settlement dispositive of all claims and defenses asserted in the underlying 

trial court matter and requesting a dismissal of both appeals. Appellant has signed both 
Spears v. State Page 2

motions, and appellee is unopposed to the relief requested.

The suspension of these appeals is lifted. Appellant’s motions are granted, and 

the appeals are dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). 

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, 

Justice Johnson, and 

Justice Davis1

Motions granted

Appeals dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed March 15, 2023

Do not publish 

[OT06]

1 The Honorable Rex Davis, Senior Justice (Retired) of the Tenth Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment 

of the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court. See TEX. GOV'T CODE §§ 74.003, 75.002, 75.003.
Total users

70.0K

-17.0% from previous 30 days

Sessions

92.3K

-13.6% from previous 30 days

30-day active users

147.3K

-4.3% from previous 30 days

Nov 1, 2023 - Nov 30, 2023 ▼

FLETC All Website Data - ▼

Views Engagement rate

1. 218,626 58.8%

▼

1 - 1 / 1

< >

Pageviews and Engagement

new returning

26.2%

72.8%

New vs. Returned Visitors

google

(direct)

bing

dhs.gov

(not set)

fletcprod.modolabs.n

usajobs.gov

duckduckgo

yahoo

others

17.3%

64.7%

Visits by Source

Average session duration Engaged sessions

1. 00:02:55 54,265

▼

1 - 1 / 1

< >

Session Details

FLETC.gov Web Performance Metrics

Page title Views

No data

▲

Top Overall Pages

Active users 30-day active users

1... 68,598 147,256

▼

1 - 1 / 1

< >

Active Users
Views

3PM

11AM

12PM

1PM

10AM

2PM

8PM

9AM

7PM

4PM

0

5

10

15

20

25

22

21 21 21

19 19

16 16

14

13

Hour

Pageviews by Hour

Device category Sessions

1. desktop 46,215

2. mobile 45,521

3. tablet 877

▼

1 - 3 / 3

< >

Sessions by Device Category

Session source / medium Sessions

1. google / organic 58,922

2. bing / organic 5,725

3. dhs.gov / referral 2,049

4. yahoo / organic 696

5. usajobs.gov / referral 784

6. fletc-prod.modolabs.net / ref... 8

7. sass.fletc.dhs.gov / referral 5

8. duckduckgo / organic 747

9. ncis.navy.mil / referral 270

10. usa.gov / referral 114

1 - 100 / 373

<

>

Sessions and Pageviews by Source / Medium

FLETC.gov Web Performance Metrics
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kevin Lee BARKLEY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-10558.

D.C. No. CR-00-00488-EHC.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 11, 2001.*

Decided June 21, 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 **

Kevin Lee Barkley appeals the 18-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to one count of counterfeiting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 471, one count of producing false documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(1), and one count of possession of false identification document implements, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(5). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Barkley contends that the district court erred when it enhanced his sentence pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 265.1(b)(2) (increasing offense level to 15 where defendant manufactured or produced any counterfeit obligation or possessed a counterfeiting device). This contention lacks merit.

*548We review de novo the district court’s application of the sentencing guidelines, and its factual findings for clear error. *United States v. Taylor,*991 F.2d 533, 535 (9th Cir.1993).

Because there was evidence supporting the district court’s finding that the bills' were of a “remarkable” quality and that Barkley’s counterfeiting operation was more sophisticated than mere photocopying, the district court properly applied U.S.S.G. § 2B5.1(b)(2). *Taylor,*991 F.2d at 535 (concluding that the use of a black and white copier for counterfeiting bills was of a high enough sophistication to apply § 2B5.1). We therefore affirm the district court’s application of U.S.S.G. § 2B5.1(b)(2).

AFFIRMED.1

**

 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 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

1

. All outstanding motions are denied as moot.
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES P. DeFAZIO,

Plaintiff,

v. NO. CIV. S-04-1358 LKK/GGH

HOLLISTER, INC., Plan 

Administrator; et al., O R D E R

Defendants.

 /

The court is in receipt of plaintiff’s notice of waiver of

oral argument with respect to defendants’ motion to vacate the

January 9, 2007 order reassigning the case to this court. Given

that plaintiff is not the moving party on the motion, the court

will proceed with oral argument. Should defendants also file a

notice of waiver, the court will reconsider the need for oral

argument. Plaintiff also waives oral argument on the other pending

motions. Given that the other pending motions depend on the

court’s ruling on the motion to vacate, it is premature for the

court to decide if there is a need for oral argument as to the

Case 2:04-cv-01358-WBS-GGH Document 173 Filed 03/12/07 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

2

other motions. Accordingly, the court orders as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s Notice of Waiver is DISREGARDED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: March 12, 2007.

Case 2:04-cv-01358-WBS-GGH Document 173 Filed 03/12/07 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CHARLES L. TIMMONS

v.

DAVID DIGUGLIELMO, et al.

: CIVIL ACTION 

:

: NO. 05-3801

: 

:

ORDER

AND NOW, this 12 day of October, 2006, upon careful and independent TH

consideration of the pleadings and the record herein, and after review of the Report and

Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Timothy R. Rice, and having received no

objections thereto, it is ORDERED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED;

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, is

DISMISSED.

3. There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability.

BY THE COURT:

 /s/ Bruce W. Kauffman 

BRUCE W. KAUFFMAN, J.

Case 2:05-cv-03801-BWK Document 13 Filed 10/12/06 Page 1 of 1
No. 67828.

#### Rex Sales Co. and Arthur J. Fritz & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 60/20621 (New York).

*332Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involyed in *Falcon Sales Company*and *J. J. Murphy & Co.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 129, C.D. 2292), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

November 16, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00751

- CV

IN RE R.P., III, N.J.P., L.M.P., T.J.P., AND D.D.P.

,

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017

- PA

- 02162 Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant’s motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal, which we construe also as a response to our November 1, 2018 order requesting that counsel reasonably explain the failure to timely file the notice of appeal under Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 615 (1997), is granted. Although the clerk’s record in this case has been filed, neither the docketi ng statement nor the reporter’s record in this case has been filed. We ORDER counsel for appellant, Shawn Sheffield, to file the docketing statement within 10 days of this order.

Furthermore, on October 30, 2018, this court notified the court reporter, E lva Chapa, that the reporter’s record was past due and the reporter’s record must be filed within 10 days of our letter. The court reporter has not filed the reporter’s record or otherwise responded to our October 30, 2018 letter. We therefore ORDER the co urt reporter, Elva Chapa, to file the reporter’s record within 10 days of this order. Requests for additional time to file the reporter’s

record will be disfavored.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 16th day of November, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
No. 47356.

#### Protest 9206-K of Palestine House (New York).

Opinion 'by

Cline, J.

At the trial the protest was submitted without the introduction of testimony in support' of the claim made. The protest was therefore overruled.
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EARNEST CASSELL WOODS, II,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1225 LKK GGH P 

vs.

TOM L. CAREY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On May 17, 2006, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate

judge’s order filed May 5, 2006, denying plaintiff’s motions to re-open discovery. Pursuant to

E.D. Local Rule 72-303(f), a magistrate judge’s orders shall be upheld unless “clearly erroneous

or contrary to law.” Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the

magistrate judge’s ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.

 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, upon reconsideration, the order of

the magistrate judge filed May 5, 2006, is affirmed. 

DATED: September 28, 2006

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/wood1225.850

Case 2:04-cv-01225-MCE-AC Document 107 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 1
# COVER

# TABLE 1

# TABLE 2

# TABLE 3

# TABLE 4
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

1

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

View a Deposit 

To view a deposit, complete the following steps:

1. From the Deposit Processing tab, click View Deposits. The View Deposit page appears. 

2. From the Select Display drop-down menu, select My Deposits in Process, Adjustments 

in Error, Deposits in Error, or Deposits Within My Organization.

3. Click the Voucher Number of the deposit you need to view as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. View Deposits Page

• By default, up to 10 records are displayed per page. To change the number of 

records displayed per page, select from the drop-down menu options next to the 

record count. 

• When your Financial Institution makes an adjustment to a deposit, it appears in the 

Adj. column of the Deposit Transactions section of the table. 

• To view additional details, click the appropriate Voucher Number.

• The View Confirmed Deposit page appears. Under Adjustment Information, click 

the Voucher Number to view the deposit adjustment details.

Application Tips
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

2

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

• Click Cancel to return to the OTCnet Home Page. No data 

is saved. 

• Click Confirm to confirm a deposit (Visible if a user has 

Deposit Confirmer privileges).

• Click Clear to clear all data fields and reset to the default selections.

• Click Delete to eliminate the deposit. (Visible if a user has Deposit

• Preparer privileges.)

• Click Print Deposit Ticket to print a formatted deposit ticket.

• Click View Voucher Event Log to view the history of the 

deposit voucher.

• Click Voucher Event State to view voucher details.

• Click Next to advance to the next page. (Visible only in My Deposits in Process 

view).

• Click Previous to return to the previous page.

• Click Return Home to return to the OTCnet Home Page. 

• Click Reject to reject a deposit (Visible if a user has Deposit Confirmer privileges.)

• Click Adjust to adjust a deposit (Visible if a user has Deposit Confirmer privileges.)

• Click Save as Draft to save the information without submitting the deposit. (Visible if 

a user has Deposit Preparer privileges.)

• Click Submit to complete the process and display the Confirmation 

page. (Visible if a user has Deposit Approver privileges.)

• Click Update CAN/ACCT Key to update the account number assigned to a deposit. 

(Visible if a user has Deposit Confirmer privileges.)

• Click Add Adjustment to adjust a deposit. (Not visible for Foreign Check Items.)

Additional Buttons
**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 **

|                                             |                                                   |                                                         |
|--------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                        |                                              |                                                    |
| Date: October 16,                2006       | By:                                          | */s/              John B. Gallagher*                         |
|                                             |                                                   | Name: John                B. Gallagher        |
|                                             |                                                   | Title:                 Co-Chief Executive Officer  |
|                                             |                                                   |                                                         |
|                                             |                                                   |                                                         |
| Date: October 16,                2006  | By:                                               | */s/ Harry D. Shields*                                  |
|                                             | Name: Harry                D. Shields             |
|                                             | Title:                 Co-Chief Executive Officer |

----
EXHIBIT 32

          Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted
            Pursuant to Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Daniel C. Wright,  the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
GolfGear International,  Inc. (the "Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, that to the best of
my knowledge:

(1)  the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of the  Company for the period  ended
     June 30,  2004 (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.

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version 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.

Dated:  July 25, 2005                   /s/ Daniel C. Wright
                                        Daniel C. Wright
                                        Chief Executive Officer and
                                        Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 23


                       Consent of Independent Accountants



The Board of Directors
Xanser Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in registration  statements numbers
333-83970,  333-83968,  333-68558,  333-34496,  333-60195, 333-22109, 333-14071,
333-14069,  333-14067,  333-08727,  333-08725, 333-08723, 33-58981, 33-54027 and
33-41295 on Form S-8 of Xanser  Corporation  (formerly  known as Kaneb Services,
Inc.). of our report dated March 4, 2002,  relating to the consolidated  balance
sheets of Xanser  Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000,
and the related  consolidated  statements  of income,  changes in  stockholders'
equity  and cash  flows for each of the  years in the  three-year  period  ended
December 31, 2001, and related  schedules,  which report is included on page F-1
of this Form 10-K.


                                                KPMG LLP

Dallas, Texas
March 26, 2002