alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 9494)

#### Mayer Textile Machine Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 872, etc.

(Decided August 19, 1959)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

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

Lawrence, Judge:

The appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in the schedule, attached to and made part of this decision, present the question of the proper dutiable value of certain machines and parts thereof.

The parties hereto have entered into a stipulation of fact wherein it has been agreed that, as to reappraisement numbers R58/22659-833, R58/22660-834, R58/22661-835, and R58/22662-836, the market value or the price at the time of exportation of the merchandise invoiced as “Raschel” machines for rubber knitting, without motor, complete with accessories, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, 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, was German deutsche marks 22,500 each, net, packed. It was further stipulated and agreed that there was no higher export value for merchandise such as or similar to the merchandise herein involved at the time of exportation thereof.

As to reappraisement numbers R58/20475-812 and R58/20476-813, the appeals for a reappraisement, having been untimely filed, were abandoned.

Upon the record before the court, I find and hold that foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 *482(19 U.S.C. § 1402(c)), as amended *by*the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, is the proper basis of value for the merchandise invoiced as “Raschel” machines for rubber knitting, without motor, complete with accessories, covered by reappraisement numbers R58/22659-833, R58/22660-834, R58/22661-835, and R58/22662-836, and that said value is German deutsche marks 22,500 each, net, packed.

As to reappraisement numbers R58/20475-812 and R58/20476-813, the appeals for a reappraisement, having been abandoned, are dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
CERTIFICATION OF
 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Corumel Minerals Corp. for the quarterly period ending December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Corumel Minerals Corp.
 
 
 By:                /s/ Bruce P. Young
 
 Name: Bruce P. Young
 
 Title: Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
 
 Date: February 10, 2004
 
 
 1
No. 51989.

#### Galsworthy, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 118288-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

JoHNSON, 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 the various barrels, casks, packages, etc., 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 gaugers’ returns as verified by the affidavits of the importers. The protests were sustained to this extent.
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

MARY JANE SANCHEZ,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-1789 LKK PAN P

vs.

BOARD OF PRISON TERMS, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 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 March 16, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Petitioner

has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

Although it appears from the file that petitioner’s copy of the findings and

recommendations were returned, petitioner was properly served. It is the petitioner’s

responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local

Case 2:04-cv-01789-LKK -PAN Document 6 Filed 05/13/05 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

Rule 83-182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.

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:

1. The findings and recommendations filed March 16, 2005, are adopted in full;

and

2. The petition is dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies.

DATED: May 12, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-01789-LKK -PAN Document 6 Filed 05/13/05 Page 2 of 2
Faulk, Scott (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Attachments: 

Mr. Kyle Potthoff 

Public Works Director 

City of McCook 

Dear Mr. Potthoff: 

Schlemmer, Kevin (OST) 

Monday, February 03, 2014 12:41 PM 

potthoff@cityofmccook.com; ldoak@cityofmccook.com; lori@cityofmccook.com 

Doug Voss (dvoss@flygreatlakes.com); Chuck Howell; Tim Sieber; Carrier, Seaport, Rob 

McKinney; Devany, Dennis (OST); Faulk, Scott (OST) 

Requesting Comments from the City of McCook on EAS proposal? 

Great Lakes.pdf; SeaPort.pdf 

.... ·· .. ·-···· ................ 

I would like to update you on the Essential Air Service situation at McCook and give you an opportunity to 

submit any comments for the record if you wish. In anticipation of the end of Great Lakes' current contract on 

May 31, 2014, the Department issued Order 2013-12-10, on December 20, 2013, to solicit proposals from all 

interested air carriers to provide service at McCook. In response to that Order, we received proposals from the 

incumbent air carrier, Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd. ("Great Lakes"), and SeaPort Airlines, Inc. ("SeaPort"). 

Copies of the proposals are attached and may be accessed online through the Department's Dockets 

Management System at: http://www.regulations.gov/ by entering "DOT-OST-1997-3005" in the "Enter 

Keyword or ID" field, so we will only briefly summarize the proposals here. 

Great Lakes' proposal would continue to offer 12 weekly nonstop round trips between McCook and Denver 

utilizing a 19-seat Beechcraft 1900D aircraft, at a requested annual subsidy rate of$2,254,017. 

SeaPort's proposal consists of the following three options, all utilizing a 9-seat Cessna Grand Caravan aircraft: 

1. 12 weekly nonstop round trips between McCook and Wichita, at an annual subsidy request of 

$1,938,697; 

2. 12 weekly nonstop round trips between McCook and Omaha, at an annual subsidy request of 

$2,022,3 82; and 

3. 12 weekly nonstop round trips between McCook and Wichita, and 6 weekly nonstop round trips 

between McCook and Kansas City, at a combined annual subsidy request of$2,706,256. 

We want to give you an opportunity to submit any formal comments for the record before we submit a 

recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs. We request that you submit 

any comments you may have as soon as possible, but in any case no later than March 7, 2014. We will 

carefully consider your comments before we submit a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for a 

decision. If you have any questions or if you find that you need additional time to draft your comments, please 

let me know. 

Please send your comments to me at the following email address: EAS@dot.gov or by fax to 202-366-7838. If 

you have any questions, please feel free to contact Scott Faulk of my staff at scott.faulk@dot.gov or 202-366-

9967. 

Sincerely, 

1 
Kevin Schlemmer 

Chief, Essential Air Service & Domestic Analysis Division 

United States Department of Transportation 

1 200 New Jersey Ave SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

(202) 366-317 6 phone 

(202) 366-7638 fax 

2
Case No. 9,774a.

#### MOORE v. SEARCY.

[Hempst. 52.] 1

Superior Court, Territory of Arkansas.

April, 1828.

Liens — Debt Due to Trustee by Cestui Que Trust — Claim op Trustee to be First Satisfied.

1. S. having the legal title to land, but one half of it in equity belonging to C. deceased, cannot have a debt against C. satisfied out of the land, to the exclusion of other creditors, but must come in equally with them.

2. The land decreed to be sold for the benefit of all the creditors.

Bill in chancery.

Before JOHNSON, ESKRIDGE, and TRIMBLE, JJ.

1

 [Repoited by Samuel H. Hempstead, Esq.]

OPINION OF

THE COURT.

This is a suit in chancery brought by Thomas Moore, administrator of the estate of Thomas Cur-ran, deceased, to coerce the conveyance of certain real property, namely, one undivided half of the east half of the north-east quarter of section ten of township thirteen north, in range six west, containing eighty acres, more or less; also the one half of forty acres of ground, more or less, of section seventeen of township thirteen north, in *700range six west, lying below the town of Batesville, fronting White river, and joining the lands of Charles Kelly and Hartwell Boswell, lying and being in the county of Independence and territory of Arkansas. The bill charges, tha t the said Curran in his lifetime, and said Richard Searcy, with their joint funds and in partnership, entered the property in controversy at the United States land-office at Batesville; that, by agreement between the parties, the patents for said lands issued in the name of said Searcy; that Curran afterwards died insolvent, and prays the conveyance of one half of the above described lands. The defendant, in his answer, admits the several allegations as set forth in the complainant’s bill, but alleges that Curran died indebted to him in the sum of five hundred and sixty-seven dollars and sixty-six cents, which is not denied by the complainant; and contends that he holds a lien in equity on the property in controversy for the full amount of his debt against the estate. This is a controversy between the creditors of Curran, of whom the defendant is one, and a decree of conveyance will be for the benefit of all. Searcy, as a creditor, has only the same equity that the others have; and the accidental circumstance of his being invested with the legal title, cannot avail him in a court of equity to the prejudice and exclusion of the other credit- or's. Sale decreed accordingly.
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

LESHANE J. HOLMES, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV-S-04-2377 LKK KJM P 

vs.

JEANNE S. WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER FOR PAYMENT

 / OF INMATE FILING FEE

To: The Director of the California Department of Corrections, 1515 S Street, Sacramento,

California 95814:

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, is obligated to

pay the statutory filing fee in effect at the time of filing of this action, $150.00. Plaintiff has been

assessed an initial partial filing fee of $1.29 for this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). 

Upon payment of that initial partial filing fee, plaintiff will be obligated to make monthly

payments in the amount of twenty percent of the preceding month’s income credited to plaintiff’s

trust account. The California Department of Corrections is required to send to the Clerk of the

Court the initial partial filing fee and thereafter payments from plaintiff’s prison trust account

each time the amount in the account exceeds $10.00, until the statutory filing fee of $150.00 is

paid in full. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

Case 2:04-cv-02377-JKS-EFB Document 6 Filed 05/17/05 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

Good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Director of the California Department of Corrections or a designee shall

collect from plaintiff’s prison trust account an initial partial filing fee in the amount of $1.29 and

shall forward the amount to the Clerk of the Court. Said payment shall be clearly identified by

the name and number assigned to this action.

2. Thereafter, the Director of the California Department of Corrections or a

designee shall collect from plaintiff's prison trust account the $148.71 balance of the filing fee by

collecting monthly payments from plaintiff's prison trust account in an amount equal to twenty

percent (20%) of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's trust account and

forwarding payments to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in the account exceeds

$10.00 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The payments shall be clearly identified by

the name and number assigned to this action. 

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order and a copy of

plaintiff's signed in forma pauperis affidavit on Director, California Department of Corrections,

1515 S Street, Sacramento, California 95814.

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Financial

Department of the court.

DATED: May 16, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

holm2377.cdc

Case 2:04-cv-02377-JKS-EFB Document 6 Filed 05/17/05 Page 2 of 2
32.1 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER  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 Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund V,
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Kimberly A. Springsteen-Abbott, Chief Executive 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, to the best of 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 result of operations of the
Company.




/s/Kimberly A.
      Springsteen-AbbottKimberly
      A. Springsteen-AbbottChief
      Executive OfficerNovember
      16, 2009
pdfproof.pdf

EXHIBIT 10.1
 
 
 
 
	 
	1

	

	 


 
 
	 
	2

	

	 


 
 
	 
	3

	

	 


 
 
 
	4
<PAGE>


                     32.2 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CFO

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL 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 Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund V,
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Kimberly A. Springsteen, Principal Financial 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, to the best of 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 result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Kimberly A. Springsteen
---------------------------
Kimberly A. Springsteen
Principal Financial Officer
August 11, 2005
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

MARTIN FRUTOS, JR.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2361 GEB PAN P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER FOR PAYMENT

 / OF INMATE FILING FEE

To: The Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, 1515 S Street,

Sacramento, California 95814:

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, is obligated to

pay the statutory filing fee of $150.00 for this action. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Plaintiff is

obligated to make monthly payments in the amount of twenty percent of the preceding month’s

income credited to plaintiff’s trust account. The California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation is required to send to the Clerk of the Court payments from plaintiff’s account

each time the amount in the account exceeds $10.00, until the statutory filing fee is paid in full. 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2).

 /////

Case 2:04-cv-02361-ALA Document 17 Filed 09/13/06 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

In accordance with the above and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

1. The Director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation or

a designee shall collect monthly payments from plaintiff’s prison trust account in an amount

equal to twenty percent (20%) of the preceding month's income credited to the prisoner's trust

account and shall forward those payments to the Clerk of the Court each time the amount in the

account exceeds $10.00 in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2) until a total of $150.00 has

been collected and forwarded to the Clerk of the Court. The payments shall be clearly identified

by the name and number assigned to this action. 

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order and a copy of

plaintiff's in forma pauperis affidavit on Director, California Department of Corrections and

Rehabilitation, 1515 S Street, Sacramento, California 95814.

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Financial

Department of the court.

DATED: September 12, 2006.

14

frut2361.Cdca

Case 2:04-cv-02361-ALA Document 17 Filed 09/13/06 Page 2 of 2
124 STAT. 3278 PUBLIC LAW 111–304—DEC. 14, 2010 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 6237: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010): 

Nov. 16, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 2, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–304 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1351 2nd 

Street in Napa, California, as the ‘‘Tom Kongsgaard Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. TOM KONGSGAARD POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 1351 2nd Street in Napa, California, shall be 

known and designated as the ‘‘Tom Kongsgaard Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Tom Kongsgaard Post Office Building’’. 

Approved December 14, 2010. 

Dec. 14, 2010 

[H.R. 6237] 


etreine on DSKHP91DQ1 with PUBLIC LAWS
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

EDDIE LEE RADFORD,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1679 MCE KJM P

vs.

T. FELKER, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff has requested an extension of the time to file an amended complaint

provided in the court’s order of May 12, 2005. Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s request for an

extension will be granted.

Plaintiff also has requested the appointment of counsel. The United States

Supreme Court has ruled that district courts lack authority to require counsel to represent

indigent prisoners in § 1983 cases. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court, 490 U.S. 296, 298

(1989). In certain exceptional circumstances, the court may request the voluntary assistance of

counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(1). Terrell v. Brewer, 935 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.

1991); Wood v. Housewright, 900 F.2d 1332, 1335-36 (9th Cir. 1990). In the present case, the

court does not find the required exceptional circumstances. Plaintiff’s request for the

appointment of counsel therefore will be denied.

Case 2:04-cv-01679-MCE -KJM Document 8 Filed 06/03/05 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s May 25, 2005 motion for an extension of time is granted;

2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file an

amended complaint; and

3. Plaintiff’s May 25, 2005 request for the appointment of counsel is denied.

DATED: June 2, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1/kf

radf1679.36+

Case 2:04-cv-01679-MCE -KJM Document 8 Filed 06/03/05 Page 2 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAYMOND GLADDEN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-1866 EJG GGH P

vs.

D.L. RUNNELS, ORDER

Respondents.

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In 1995 petitioner was convicted of kidnapping for extortion and

murder. Petitioner is serving a sentence of life without the possibility of parole plus 22 years. 

Pending before the court is respondent’s August 4, 2006, motion to file an amended answer

noticed for hearing October 5, 2006. 

Petitioner was originally represented by attorney Frank Prantil who has since been

disbarred. In light of the length of petitioner’s sentence, the court has determined that the

interests of justice require appointment of new counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see

also Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Respondent’s motion is vacated

pending resolution of the issue of petitioner’s representation.

Case 2:04-cv-01866-FCD-GGH Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 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

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Respondent’s August 4, 2006, motion to amend is vacated; the hearing set

before the undersigned for October 5, 2006, regarding this motion is vacated;

2. The Federal Defender is appointed to represent petitioner;

3. Within thirty days of this order, petitioner’s counsel shall file a status report

addressing when an opposition to respondent’s motion will be filed. 

4. The Clerk of the Court shall electronically serve a copy of this order on David

Porter, Assistant Federal Defender.

DATED: 8/15/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ggh:kj

gla1866.vac

Case 2:04-cv-01866-FCD-GGH Document 23 Filed 08/15/06 Page 2 of 2