alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 67835.

#### Inter-Maritime Fwdg. Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 327774-K (New York).

*337Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 CCPA 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 Wired Associates Solutions Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Scott
Delbeck, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
13th day of September, 2007.


/s/ Scott Delbeck
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit



    



Exhibit 10.31 


[Accenture plc letterhead]




As determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Accenture plc (the “Company”), the Company has amended your [Restricted Share Unit Agreement] (the “RSU Agreement”) as set forth below, in order to provide for accelerated delivery of any previously vested but unreleased shares in the event of your death following a qualifying termination of employment. Capitalized terms used herein without definition have the meanings assigned to such terms under the RSU Agreement or the Amended and Restated Accenture plc 2010 Share Incentive Plan, as applicable.  The Company hereby amends and restates the first sentence of Section 3(b) of the RSU Agreement to include a new sub-clause (ii) thereof, so that such sentence will read in its entirety as follows: 


“(b) Death or Disability.  Notwithstanding Section 3(a) of this Agreement, if (i) the Participant’s employment with the Constituent Companies terminates due to the Participant’s death or Disability, the Company shall issue or cause to be transferred to the Participant or to his or her estate, as the case may be, a number of Shares equal to the aggregate number of RSUs granted to the Participant hereunder (rounded down to the next whole Share) as soon as practicable following such termination of employment, at which time a number of RSUs equal to the number of Shares issued or transferred to the Participant or to his or her estate shall be extinguished or (ii) the Participant dies following an involuntary not for Cause termination of employment with the Constituent Companies, the Company shall issue or cause to be transferred to the Participant’s estate all previously vested but unreleased Shares (rounded down to the next whole Share) as soon as practicable following receipt of satisfactory evidence of such Participant’s death; provided, however, that upon the issuance or transfer of Shares to the Participant or to his or her estate, in lieu of a fractional Share, the Participant or his or her estate, as the case may be, shall receive a cash payment equal to the Fair Market Value of such fractional Share.” 


Except as expressly set forth in this letter, the terms and conditions set forth in your RSU Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 


	
	
	ACCENTURE PLC

	 

	By:

	 

	 

	Chad T. Jerdee

	General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer
Before the Second Division,

June 21, 1956

No. 60061.

#### Kroder Reubel Co., Inc., and Alltransport, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 258173-K and 258324-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cafe curtain clips in chief value of brass and that said merchandise is chiefly used in the household to fasten window curtains to curtain rods, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 58033.

protests 194024-K, etc. (New York).

#### W. A. Cleary Corp. and W. R. Keating & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

*467Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of lecithin (soybean residual sludge) similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *C. J. Tower & Sons*(38 C. C. P. A. 131, C. A. D. 450), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Before the Third Division,

June 23, 1941

No. 46109.

#### Protest 55287-K of Jules S. Bache (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

No evidence was offered in support of the claim made. The protest was therefore overruled.
No. 47376.

#### Protest 58897-K of E. Dillingham (Ogdensburg).

*379Opinion by

Walker, J.

It was stipulated that the lumber in question is similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Seaboard Lumber Sales Co.*v. *United States*(5 Cust. Ct. 161, C. D. 391). In accordance therewith it was held that the tax imposed should have been assessed on the basis of the condition in which imported, and that no addition should have been made for the planing, tonguing, and grooving. Protest sustained to this extent.
REED

S

MIT

H LLP

A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware

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 

No.: CIV. S-04-1684 DFL KJM – 1 – DOCSOAK-9793385.1-HHOESTEREY 

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL; [PROPOSED] ORDER 

James H. Fleming (SBN 042226) 

Linda B. Oliver (SBN 166720) 

REED SMITH LLP

1999 Harrison Street, Suite 2400 

Oakland, CA 94612-3572 

Mailing Address:

P.O. Box 2084 

Oakland, CA 94604-2084 

Telephone: 510.763.2000 

Facsimile: 510.273.8832 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance 

Company 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOHN C. ROBINSON, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE 

INSURANCE COMPANY, SUCCESSOR IN 

INTEREST TO CONNECTICUT MUTUAL 

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, and DOES 1 

through 20, inclusive, 

Defendants. 

No.: CIV. S-04-1684 DFL KJM 

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this action, through their 

respective counsel of record, that the Court may make and enter its order dismissing the 

above-captioned action with prejudice in its entirety, each party to bear their own costs and 

fees. 

Case 2:04-cv-01684-DFL -KJM Document 42 Filed 10/20/05 Page 1 of 2
REED

S

MIT

H LLP

A limited liability partnership formed in the State of Delaware

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 

No.: CIV. S-04-1684 DFL KJM – 2 – DOCSOAK-9793385.1-HHOESTEREY 

STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL; [PROPOSED] ORDER 

DATED: October __, 2005. 

LAW OFFICES OF JOHN M. REISTENBERG 

By //s// John M. Ristenberg__________

John M. Riestenberg 

Attorneys for Plaintiff John C. Robinson 

DATED: October __. 2005. 

REED SMITH LLP

By //s// Linda B. Oliver_____________

Linda B. Oliver 

Attorneys for Defendant 

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance 

Company 

IT IS SO ORDERED: 

DATED: October 19, 2005. 

By /s/ David F. Levi______________

The Honorable David F. Levi 

United States District Court Judge 

Case 2:04-cv-01684-DFL -KJM Document 42 Filed 10/20/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 51713.

#### Protest 110224-K of Paramount Distillers, Inc. (Cleveland).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Somerset*(33 C. C. P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328), and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the total contents of barrels numbered 5, 35, 54, 89, 94, *196106, 107, 108, 120, 128, 163, 170, and 179, was lost in transit from the port of exportation to the port of destination due to breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss appearing upon the gauger’s return as verified by the affidavit of the importer. The protest was sustained to this extent.
No. 47875.

#### Protests 962813-G, etc., of Albert Eckstein & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 47291 the hats or hoods in question were held dutiable under paragraph 1504 (b) (1) as claimed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 August 3, 2016

t0726

Order 

Clerk

August 3, 2016

153082

DEANNA D. MABRY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 153082

COA: 329786

Washtenaw CC: 15-001873-DC

JOHANNA SUZANNE-GRAINE MABRY,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________/

AMENDMENT TO ORDER

On order of the Court, this Court’s August 2, 2016 order is amended to correct a 

clerical error in footnote 3 of Justice MCCORMACK’s statement. The footnote is 

corrected to read as follows:

Any exception to our decision in Van, 460 Mich 320, limiting the equitableparent doctrine to married couples would extend only to the small group of 

same-sex couples who were unconstitutionally prohibited from marrying 

but separated before the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell and have a 

custody dispute.

The remainder of the order remains unchanged.
# EUR-Lex - 52007AP0004 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52007AP0004

**European Parliament legislative resolution on the Council common position with a view to the adoption of a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the certification of train drivers operating locomotives and trains on the railway system in the Community (5893/5/2006 - C6-0310/2006 - 2004/0048(COD)) **

*
Official Journal 244 E , 18/10/2007 P. 0127 - 0128 *

P6_TA(2007)0004

Certification of train drivers operating locomotives and trains on the railway system in the Community ***II

European Parliament legislative resolution on the Council common position with a view to the adoption of a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the certification of train drivers operating locomotives and trains on the railway system in the Community (5893/5/2006 — C6-0310/2006 — 2004/0048(COD))

(Codecision procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Council common position (5893/5/2006 — C6-0310/2006) [1],

- having regard to its position at first reading [2] on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2004)0142) [3],

- having regard to Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty,

- having regard to Rule 62 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A6-0480/2006),

1. Approves the common position as amended;

2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

[1] OJ C 289 E, 28.11.2006, p. 42.

[2] OJ C 227 E, 21.9.2006, p. 464.

[3] Not yet published in OJ.

--------------------------------------------------
EXHIBIT 31.2
                           SECTION 302 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Scott Thompson, certify that:

         1. I have  reviewed  this annual report on form 10-KSB of The X- Change
Corporation, Inc.,

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4. The small business  issuer's other certifying  officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining  disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in exchange act rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the small business issuer and
have:

a) designed such disclosure  controls and procedures,  or caused such disclosure
controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to ensure that
material  information  relating  to the small  business  issuer,  including  its
consolidated subsidiaries,  is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)  evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  small  business  issuer's  disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our  conclusions  about the
effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the
period covered by this report on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business  issuer's  internal
control  over  financial  reporting  that  occurred  during  the small  business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business  issuer's  fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual  report) that has  materially  affected,  or is
reasonably  likely to materially  affect,  the small business  issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business  issuer's other certifying  officers and I have disclosed,
based  on  our  most  recent  evaluation  of  internal  control  over  financial
reporting,  to the small business  issuer's  auditors and the audit committee of
small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all  significant  deficiencies  and  material  weaknesses  in the  design  or
operation of internal  control over  financial  reporting  which are  reasonably
likely to  adversely  affect  the small  business  issuer's  ability  to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant  role in the small business  issuer's  internal
control over financial reporting.

Date: April 13, 2005
/S/ Scott Thompson
Scott Thompson
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
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 on Form 10-K of Keane, Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brian T. Keane, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Keane, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|Date: March 15, 2005 |  | /s/BRIAN T. KEANEBrian T. Keane
President and Chief Executive Officer
|-------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
Jump to main content.

Office of Inspector General

Recent Additions | Contact Us**Search:**All EPAThis Area

    - You are here:  EPA Home
    >
    Audits, Evaluations & Other Publications
     >
    Superfund/Land

----

#         Laboratory Data Quality at Federal Facility Superfund Sites

## **Table of Contents**

    -  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
    -  PURPOSE 
    -  FINDING 

Laboratory Data Quality at Federal Facility Superfund Sites 

Results in Brief 

Background 

Serious Problems With Laboratory Data Quality 

Quality Assurance Project Plans Not Well Designed 

EPA Oversight Insufficient 

Federal Quality Systems Not Evaluated 

Laboratory Evaluations Not Shared 

EPA Oversight Role Not Defined 

Environmental Data Quality a Material Weakness 

Performance Measures Not Established 

Recommendations 

Agency Comments 

    -  AUDIT SCOPE  APPENDICES         - A Program Office Responses to Draft Report
      - B Acronyms
      - C How Federal Facilities on the NPL are Cleaned Up
      - D Data Quality Problems
      - E Definitions of Quality Assurance Activities
      - F Planning Procedure for Defining Data Quality Objectives
      - G Example of Quality Assurance Report
      - H Activities Contacted During the Audit
      - I Distribution 

----

    - EPA OIG Home Page 
    - EPA Home Page 

Created April 7, 1997

Top of page

 

----

### Local Navigation

    - OIG Home
    - About EPA OIG
    - Electronic Reading Room
    - Federal & Congressional Reports
    - Planning & Performance Documents
    - Public Liaison (Ombudsman) & Hotline
    - Investigations
    - OIG Newsroom
    - Disaster Response
    - Compendium of Environmental Programs
    - Freedom of Information Act
    - Career Opportunities
    - Helpful Links
    - How to Contact Us

----

    - FirstGov
    - White House

----

    - EPA Home
    - Privacy and Security Notice
    - Contact Us

Jump to main content.
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated October 18, 2016, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-212825) of Smart Trust 273,
comprising Smart Trust, Miller/Howard North American Energy Opportunities Trust, Series 4.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


October 18, 2016
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Margaret ALCORN; G.D. Massey, Defendants-Appellants. Robert J. Harrison, Defendant, Robert Korfhage; Matt Craddock, Counter-defendants.

No. 00-35843.

D.C. No. CV-00-06132-MRH.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted 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 **

Margaret Alcorn and G.D. Massey appeal pro se the district court’s entry of judgment on the pleadings under Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(c) in favor of the government, the district court’s correction of the judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(a), and the district court’s permanent injunction against Alcorn and Massey in the United States’ action against Alcorn and Massey for cutting and removing timber from public lands. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo judgments on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). *Honey v. Distelrath,*195 F.3d 531, 533 (9th Cir.1999), *cert. denied,*529 U.S. 1054, 120 S.Ct. 1557, 146 L.Ed.2d 462 (2000). We review for abuse of discretion the grant of a motion to correct judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(a), *Robi v. Five Platters, Inc.,*918 F.2d 1439, 1445 (9th Cir.1990), and permanent injunctions. *Rolex Watch, U.S.A., Inc. v. Michel Co.,*179 F.3d 704, 708 (9th Cir.1999). We affirm.

Because Alcorn and Massey did not allege that they had permission to cut and remove timber from public lands, the district court did not err in granting the United States judgment on the pleadings. *See*43 C.F.R. § 5511.3-2.

Because the corrected judgment reflected the actual intention and necessary implications of the district court’s decision, the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting the motion to correct the judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(a). *See Robi,*918 F.2d at 1445.

*575Because the district court’s conclusion is not based on clearly erroneous factual findings and does not rely on erroneous legal conclusions, the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting to the United States a permanent injunction against Alcorn and Massey. *See Multnomah Legal Servs. Workers Union v. Legal Servs. Corp.,*936 F.2d 1547, 1552 (9th Cir.1991).

Alcorn and Massey’s contentions regarding the unconstitutionality of the regulations are raised for the first time on appeal. Because Alcorn and Massey have not made a showing of exceptional circumstances, we will not consider these arguments. *See El Paso City of Tex. v. Am. W. Airlines, Inc. (In re Am. W. Airlines, Inc.),*217 F.3d 1161, 1165 (9th Cir.2000).

AFFIRMED.

**

 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.
Stipulation to Amend Complaint and Order Thereon Sanford v. Ralphs Grocery Company 

 Case No. CIV.S 04-2037 LKK KJM 

 

 

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

LYNN HUBBARD, III, SBN 69773 

SCOTTLYNN J HUBBARD, IV, SBN 212970 

ADAM SORRELLS, SBN 160226 

LAW OFFICES OF LYNN HUBBARD 

12 WILLIAMSBURG LANE 

CHICO, CA 95926 

Telephone: (530) 895-3252 

Facsimile: (530) 894-8244 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JAMES SANFORD 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY dba 

RALPHS #983; MILTON HECHT; and 

DOES 1 through 10 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

No. CIV.S 04-2037 LKK KJM 

STIPULATION TO AMEND 

COMPLAINT AND ORDER 

THEREON 

The parties, subject to approval of the Court, stipulate as follows: 

1. BILL DEFAZIO, a party that was not named in the original complaint, 

is an owner, operator and/or lessor of the property involved in this case. 

2. The parties agree that plaintiff shall and may amend the complaint to 

name BILL DEFAZIO as a defendant. 

3. Defendants RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY dba RALPHS #983 shall 

Case 2:04-cv-02037-LKK -KJM Document 11 Filed 05/18/05 Page 1 of 2
Stipulation to Amend Complaint and Order Thereon Sanford v. Ralphs Grocery Company 

 Case No. CIV.S 04-2037 LKK KJM 

 

 

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

not be required to file an answer to the amended complaint, and their initial 

answer shall be deemed responsive to the amended complaint. 

Dated: 5/17/05 LAW OFFICES OF LYNN HUBBARD 

/s/ Lynn Hubbard, Esquire

LYNN HUBBARD, III 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Dated: 5/17/05 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 

Signature on file

STACEY L. HERTER 

Attorney for Ralphs Grocery Company 

 

IT IS SO ORDERED: 

Date: May 18, 2005 /s/Lawrence K. Karlton

Lawrence K. Karlton 

Senior Judge 

Case 2:04-cv-02037-LKK -KJM Document 11 Filed 05/18/05 Page 2 of 2