alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 456 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize non-medical counseling 

services, provided by certain mental health professionals, to military families. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 15, 2023 

Ms. SINEMA (for herself and Mr. SULLIVAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize nonmedical counseling services, provided by certain mental 

health professionals, to military families. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Comforting Our Mili5 tary Families through On-base or Remote Treatment Act’’ 

6 or the ‘‘COMFORT Act’’. 

7 SEC. 2. NON-MEDICAL COUNSELING SERVICES FOR MILI8 TARY FAMILIES. 

9 (a) NON-MEDICAL COUNSELING SERVICES.—Not10 withstanding any other provision of law, a mental health 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 456 IS

1 professional described in subsection (b) may provide non2 medical counseling services to military families at any lo3 cation in a State, the District of Columbia, or a territory 

4 or possession of the United States, without regard to 

5 where the provider or recipient of such services is located, 

6 if the provision of such services is within the scope of the 

7 authorized Federal duties of the provider. 

8 (b) COVERED MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS.— 

9 A mental health professional described in this subsection 

10 is a person who is— 

11 (1) a currently licensed or certified mental 

12 health care provider who holds an unrestricted li13 cense or certification that is— 

14 (A) issued by a State, the District of Co15 lumbia, or a territory or possession of the 

16 United States; and 

17 (B) recognized by the Secretary of De18 fense; 

19 (2) a member of the uniformed services, a civil20 ian employee of the Department of Defense, or a 

21 contractor designated by the Secretary; and 

22 (3) performing authorized duties for the De23 partment of Defense under a program or activity re24 ferred to in subsection (a). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    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

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Internet Security Systems, Inc. (the
"Corporation") for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, the
Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board of the Corporation,
certifies 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 Corporation.



/s/ THOMAS E. NOONAN
-----------------------
Thomas E. Noonan
Chairman, President and
Chief Executive Officer

August 8, 2003


                                       30
No. 55953.

protests 172257-K, 172653-K, and 172940-K (New York).

#### Schroeder Bros., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar in all material respects to Those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested not found were not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested not found. The protests were sustained to this extent.
No. 54646.

#### Advanced Ring Manufacturers, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 138904-K, etc. (New York).

*268Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the-merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of *S. Nathan & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at .10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                      KINDER MORGAN, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NAME OF COMPANY

KN Cogeneration, Inc.
Thermo Gas Marketing, Inc.
Thermo Project Management, Inc.
Valley Operating, Inc.
KN Thermo, L.L.C.
Kinder Morgan Ft. Lupton Operator LLC
Thermo Cogeneration Partnership, L.P.
Thermo Greeley, LLC
KN Telecommunications, Inc.
KN Gas Supply Services, Inc.
KN Natural Gas, Inc.
Red Rock Energy, LLC
Kinder Morgan Power Company
KN TransColorado, Inc.
Northern Gas Company
Rocky Mountain Natural Gas Company
Kinder Morgan Foundation (nonprofit)
Western Slope Energy Services, LLC
KN Gas Gathering, Inc.
MidCon Corp.
MidCon Gas Services Corp.
MCN Gulf Processing Corp.
Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America
NGPL Overthrust, Inc.
NGPL Canyon Compression Co.
Canyon Creek Compression Company
Horizon Pipeline Company, LLC
KN Management Corp.
MidCon Mexico Pipeline Corp.
Kinder Morgan Gas Natural de Mexico S. de R.L. de C.V.
KN Energy International, Inc.
Kinder Morgan Igasamex, Inc.
KM International Services, Inc.
Lake Power L.L.C.
FR Holdings L.L.C.
Front Range Energy Associates, LLC
Kinder Morgan Michigan LLC
Kinder Morgan Illinois LLC
Kinder Morgan Missouri LLC
Kinder Morgan Power Partners LLC
Kinder Morgan Michigan Pipeline LLC
Kinder Morgan Arkansas LLC
KM Turbine Facility #6 LLC
KM Turbine Facility #7 LLC
Kinder Morgan Operator LLC
Kinder Morgan Michigan Operator LLC
Kinder Morgan Michigan Servicer LLC
Kinder Morgan Michigan Contractor LLC
Kinder Morgan Michigan Developer LLC
Triton Power Company LLC
Triton Power Michigan LLC
<PAGE>

KMC Thermo, L.L.C.
Administracion y Operacion de Infraestructura, S.A. de C.V.
GNN Services, S. de R.L. de C.V.
Gas Natural del Noroeste, S.A. de C.V.
No. 50465.

#### Protests 85712-K (B), etc., of Swiss American Cheese Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline,- J.

It was stipulated as follows: (-1) That certain of the merchandise consists of cheese similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Gruyere Cheese Corp.*v. *United States*(7 Cust. Ct. 171, C. D. 562) and *Kraft Phenix Cheese Corp.*v. *United States*(10 Cust. Ct. 271, C. D. 767); and (2) that certain other merchandise consists of portions of cheese packed in boxes and that all such portions, except one portion which is Tilsit, are similar to that the subject of the above-cited case. In accordance therewith it was held that the merchandise in question is properly dutiable at 5 cents per pound, but not less than 20 percent ad valorem, under paragraph 710, as modified by T. D. 48554.
1

Medina, Dayana

From: Pettyjohn, Mary <PETTYJOHN@adeq.state.ar.us>

Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 8:36 AM

To: Medina, Dayana

Subject: FW: Revised BART FFA - Entergy Arkansas, White Bluff

Attachments: Entergy White Bluff BART FFA - Revised October 2014.pdf

Dayana,

Welcome back!!!  Here is Entergy White Bluff’s response to EPA’s August comments.

Mary

From: Triplett, David [mailto:dtripl1@entergy.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 4:30 PM 

To: Pettyjohn, Mary 

Cc: JOHNSON, GEORGE 

Subject: Revised BART FFA - Entergy Arkansas, White Bluff 

Mary,

Attached is a PDF copy of the revised BART FFA that we have prepared in response to the comments received from EPA

Region 6 in late August.  A hard copy will follow via US mail.   

Should you have any questions or concerns, please let us know.   

Thanks.   

David Triplett, P.E.

Air Lead, Arkansas Environmental Support

Entergy Services, Inc.

8-750-4030 (internal) | (501) 377-4030 (office) | (501) 650-1752 (cell)
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 Quarterly Report of m-Wise, Inc. ("the Company") on Form
10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Zach Sivan, Chief
Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:





(1)  the Report fully
comply 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.





/s/ Zach SivanZach
      Sivan, Chief Executive
Officer





Dated:
August 14, 2009
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00309-CV

Waterway Ranch, LLC

v.

City of Annetta, Texas

§

§

§

§

From the 43rd District Court

of Parker County (CV11-0288)

August 22, 2013

Opinion by Chief Justice Livingston

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that appellant Waterway Ranch, LLC shall pay all of 

the costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By _________________________________

 Chief Justice Terrie Livingston
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v DEMETRIUS G. BOYD, Private First Class, U. S. Army, Appellant

No. 27,712

May 24, 1974

*Captain Gordon R. Denison*argued the cause for Appellant, Accused. With him on the brief were *Colonel Arnold I. Melnick, Captain Clifford W Perrin, Jr.,*and *Captain T. Barry Kingham.*

*Captain Richard S. Kleager*argued the cause for Appellee, United States. With him on the brief were *Lieutenant Colonel Ronald M. Holdaway, Lieutenant Colonel Donald W. Hansen,*and *Captain M. Douglas Deitchler.*

OPINION OF THE COURT

Ferguson, Senior Judge:

In his post-trial review, the staff judge advocate erroneously advised the convening authority that the accused had been convicted of assault with intent to commit murder rather than assault whereby grievous bodily harm was intentionally inflicted, the latter offense being that of which the accused was convicted.

A review that is misleading on an important point is unacceptable. United States v Samuels, 22 USCMA 238, 46 CMR 238 (1973); United States v Cruse, 21 USCMA 286, 45 CMR 60 (1972). Here, the convening authority was advised that the accused had been convicted of a much more serious offense than was actually the fact. Based on the offense’s serious nature, the staff judge advocate recommended approval of the sentence despite the suggestion of the military judge that the adjudged punitive discharge be suspended. As there was more than a fair risk the convening authority was misled by this mischaracterization of the accused’s crime, prejudice is apparent and a new review and action is required.

The decision of the U. S. Army Court of Military Review is reversed, and the record of trial is returned to the Judge Advocate General of the Army. A new review and action by the convening authority is hereby ordered.

Chief Judge Duncan and Judge Quinn concur.
**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 Quarterly Report of CHAAS Acquisitions, LLC (the "Company")
        on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ronald J.
        Gardhouse, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
        U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.
 
 
 
 
 /s/
        RONALD J. GARDHOUSE
 Ronald
        J.
        Gardhouse
 Chief
        Financial Officer
 (Principal
        Financial Officer)
 August
        15, 2005
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 29-5 Filed 06/14/2006 Page 1 of 3

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 29 Att. 4

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 29-5 Filed 06/14/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 29-5 Filed 06/14/2006 Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The following certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8238. This certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, nor shall it be incorporated by reference in any
  filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

In connection with the Annual Report of J. W. Mays, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending July 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), we, Lloyd J. Shulman and Mark S. Greenblatt, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of the Company,
  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to our knowledge:

|   
|---
|(1)
|   
|(2)

October 8, 2009

|                                                          
|----------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ LLOYDJ. SHULMANLloyd J. ShulmanChief Executive Officer

|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ MARKS. GREENBLATTMark S. GreenblattChief Financial Officer

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



---
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4661 

To amend title 31, United States Code, to include information on improper 

payments under Federal programs, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 10, 2024 

Mr. BRAUN (for himself, Ms. ROSEN, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. 

RICKETTS, and Mr. SCOTT of Florida) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget 

A BILL 

To amend title 31, United States Code, to include information on improper payments under Federal programs, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Improper Payments 

5 Transparency Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INCLUDING IMPROPER PAYMENT INFORMATION IN 

7 PRESIDENTS BUDGET SUBMISSION. 

8 Section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code, is 

9 amended by adding at the end the following: 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4661 IS

1 ‘‘(40) information with respect to improper pay2 ment (as such term is defined in section 3351) 

3 amounts and rates for programs and activities at 

4 each executive agency required to submit improper 

5 payment reports under subchapter IV of chapter 33, 

6 including— 

7 ‘‘(A) a narrative description, including a 

8 detailed explanation with respect to why any 

9 improper payment amounts and rates occurred 

10 and trends of— 

11 ‘‘(i) each program and activity with 

12 improper payment amounts and rates that 

13 have increased or decreased on average 

14 over the previous 3 years; and 

15 ‘‘(ii) each program and activity whose 

16 improper payment amounts and rates did 

17 not change over such years; and 

18 ‘‘(B) any corrective actions, including any 

19 such action in any corrective action plan under 

20 section 3352(d), with respect to such programs 

21 and activities that are incomplete, and steps the 

22 executive agency will take to address issues re23 lating to improper payment amounts and 

24 rates.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
No. 56435.

protest 149498-K (New York).

#### Friedman Bros. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of snakeskins the same in all material respects as those passed upon in *Fleming-Joffe, Ltd.*v. *United States*(25 Cust. Ct. 56, C. D. 1263), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1765 was sustained.
Case 2:04-cv-02205-MCE -GGH   Document 36    Filed 09/26/05   Page 1 of 6

Case 2:04-cv-02205-MCE -GGH   Document 36    Filed 09/26/05   Page 2 of 6

Case 2:04-cv-02205-MCE -GGH   Document 36    Filed 09/26/05   Page 3 of 6

Case 2:04-cv-02205-MCE -GGH   Document 36    Filed 09/26/05   Page 4 of 6

Case 2:04-cv-02205-MCE -GGH   Document 36    Filed 09/26/05   Page 5 of 6

Case 2:04-cv-02205-MCE -GGH   Document 36    Filed 09/26/05   Page 6 of 6

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2012-07-26T09:42:43-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
November 10, 1947

No. 52033.

#### Abraham & Straus, Inc. *v.*United States,

petition 6583-R.

Petitioner’s application for rehearing granted.
Exhibit



Portions of this Exhibit have been redacted pursuant to a request for confidential treatment under Rule 24b-2 of the General Rules and Regulations under the Securities Exchange Act.  Omitted information, marked “[***]” in this exhibit, has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission together with such request for confidential treatment.







[Wells Fargo Capital Finance Letterhead]    Exhibit 10.2












October 25, 2016




Dan Pollack, Treasurer
Heska Corporation
3760 Rocky Mountain Avenue
Loveland, CO 80538


RE: Change to Concentration Limits 


Dear Dan:


You requested Wells Fargo make a change to the customer concentration limits as defined in the Third Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated December 30, 2005.  This provision is detailed in Section 1.1, definition of Eligible Accounts, item (xii).  Currently that section allows for [***] to be eligible up to 25% of all Accounts and [***] to be eligible up to 20% of all Accounts.  You requested the concentration limit for those accounts, as well as that for [***] to be increased to 35%.   


Effective with this letter, Section 1.1, Eligible Accounts (xii) is replaced in its entirety as follows:


“That portion of the aggregate Accounts of a single customer owed to all Borrowers in the aggregate that exceeds 15% of all Accounts of all Borrowers in the aggregate; provided, however, that for the customers listed below, such limit shall instead be the greater of the foregoing or the amount set forth opposite such customer in the  following table:


Customer             Concentration Limit
[***]                    35%
[***]                    35%
[***]                    35%”


Please sign below indicating your acknowledgement and agreement with this change and return a signed copy of this letter to my attention.


As always, please let me know if you have any questions.




Sincerely,




[***]                
[***]
[***]















ACKNOWLEGEMENT AND CONSENT:
	
							
	HESKA CORPORATION
	 
	DIAMOND ANIMAL HEALTH, INC.

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	By
	/s/ Jason Napolitano
	 
	By
	/s/ Jason Napolitano

	 
	Its
	Chief Operating Officer, Chief
	 
	 
	Its
	Chief Financial Officer

	 
	 
	Strategist and Secretary
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	HESKA IMAGING US, LLC
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	By
	/s/ Jason Napolitano
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	Its
	Chief Financial Officer
No. 48513.

#### Protest 922941-G of Sprouse-Reitz Co. (Portland, Oreg.)

Opinion by

Walker, J.

As the rubber projections obviously are bristle like in their appearance and use, and are fastened to what may be called a back, viz, ■the sponge rubber portion of the article, it was the opinion of the court that the .article falls within the scope of Webster’s definition of “brush.” Several witnesses were called. One, the examiner, referred to it in his testimony as a flesh brush used by persons taking a bath or scrubbing their skin. The plaintiff failed to offer evidence tending to establish the chief use of the article. See *United States*v. *Myers*(24 C. C. P. A. 464, T. D. 48913). On the record presented, as the plaintiff failed to rebut the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s classification, the protest was overruled in all respects.
Case No. 6,737.

#### HOUSE v. The LEXINGTON.

[The case reported under above title in 2 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 4, is the same as Case No. 6.-767a.].
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JESSE SIMKINS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1433 DFL PAN P

vs.

FOOTHILL ORTHOPEDIC 

MEDICAL CLINIC, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On January 25, 2006, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Neither

party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

Case 2:04-cv-01433-DFL-PAN Document 41 Filed 03/08/06 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

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed January 25, 2006 are adopted in full;

2. Tuolomne’s July 13, 2005 motion to dismiss is granted and claims against it

are dismissed for failure to state a claim;

3. Tennison’s August 19, 2005 motion to dismiss is granted and claims against

her are dismissed for failure to state a claim.

DATED: March 7, 2006. 

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01433-DFL-PAN Document 41 Filed 03/08/06 Page 2 of 2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

OMAR ALI ROLLIE,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 341 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 3rd day of December, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
May 9, 1947

No. 51706.

Suit 4558.

#### *Varsity Watch Co.*v. *United States.*

C. D. 1015 affirmed March 25, 1947. C. A. D. 359.
Before the Third Division,

May 27, 1959

No. 63109.

#### F. C. Mackay *v.*United States,

protest 194263-K (Pembina).

*400Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fresh or frozen boneless pork similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 59714, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 57709.

#### Rexon, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 203204-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The protest was dismissed.