alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 53559.

protests 135102-K, etc. (Baltimore and Los Angeles).

#### The American Import Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.

Cole, J., dissented on jurisdictional grounds, citing *Geo. S. Bush & Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 158, C. D. 1175), *Fuchs Shoe Corp.*v. *United States*(id. 338, Abstract 53250), and *W. R. Zanes & Co.*v. *United States*(id. 339, Abstract 53251).
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4323 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4323

  To amend title 38, United States Code, to expand eligibility for a 
housing loan guaranteed by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to certain 
          individuals who performed active duty for training.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 14, 2024

  Mrs. Shaheen (for herself and Mr. Cramer) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 38, United States Code, to expand eligibility for a 
housing loan guaranteed by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to certain 
          individuals who performed active duty for training.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Expanding Home Loans for Guard and 
Reservists Act''.

SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR HOUSING LOANS GUARANTEED BY 
              SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS.

    (a) Eligibility Expansion.--Section 3701(b) of title 38, United 
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
paragraph:
            ``(8) The term `veteran' also includes, for the purposes of 
        home loans, an individual who, for a period of not less than 90 
        consecutive days, performed active duty for training--
                    ``(A) described in subparagraph (A) or (E) of 
                paragraph (22) of section 101 of this title;
                    ``(B) other than basic training, as such term is 
                used in sections 7419, 8431, and 9419 of title 10; and
                    ``(C) on or after the day that is six years before 
                the date of the enactment of the Expanding Home Loans 
                for Guard and Reservists Act.''.
    (b) Entitlement to Housing Loan.--Section 3702(a)(2) of such title 
is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
            ``(H) Each individual described in section 3701(b)(8) of 
        this title.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 10.3

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO

NM MARIPOSA HOLDINGS, INC.

MANAGEMENT EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN

 

WHEREAS, Neiman Marcus Group, Inc., formerly known as NM Mariposa Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”), maintains the NM Mariposa Holdings, Inc. Management Equity Incentive Plan (as amended, the “Plan”);

 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XI of the Plan, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Committee”), may at any time amend the Plan, including to increase the aggregate number of shares of Common Stock of the Company that may be issued under the Plan, provided such increase is approved by the stockholders of the Company; and

 

WHEREAS, the Committee has authorized such an amendment to the Plan, subject to stockholder approval.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

 

1.                                      The name of the Plan is hereby changed to the “Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. Management Equity Incentive Plan.”

 

2.                                      Each reference to “NM Mariposa Holdings, Inc.” in the Plan is hereby changed to “Neiman Marcus Group, Inc.”

 

3.                                      The first sentence of Section 4.1(a) of the Plan is hereby replaced in its entirety with the following sentence:

 

“The aggregate number of shares of Common Stock that may be issued or used for reference purposes under the Plan or with respect to which Awards may be granted under the Plan, including with respect to Incentive Stock Options, shall not exceed 253,666 shares of Class A Common Stock and 253,666 shares of Class B Common Stock (subject, in each case, to any increase or decrease pursuant to Section 4.2).
Exhibit 99.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (the "Company")on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in thecapacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

| (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section    13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  
(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents,    in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the    Company.Dated:  February 26, 2003/s/ Richard D.    KinderRichard D. Kinder    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
  |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTINA PARKS, ) NO. CIV-S 04-1947 GEB (KJM)

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER WITHDRAWING MOTION FOR 

) LEAVE TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY AND

v. ) AMENDING STATUS (PRETRIAL

) SCHEDULING) ORDER

) 

)

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE )

COMPANY, et al., )

Defendants. )

)

On May 27, 2005, the parties filed a stipulation requesting

that pretrial scheduling dates be continued so that the parties could

attempt to resolve this case through private mediation. The parties

assert that private mediation will occur by the end of September 2005. 

In addition, the parties stipulate that the pretrial conference be

waived, contending that it is unnecessary to hold a pretrial

conference in this ERISA action. However, this has not been shown, so

a final pretrial conference will be held. Finally, the parties

stipulate that Plaintiff’s May 10, 2005, motion for leave to conduct

discovery (“Plaintiff’s Motion”), which is scheduled for hearing on

the last day to hear such a motion, be taken off-calendar until

Case 2:04-cv-01947-GEB -KJM Document 11 Filed 06/07/05 Page 1 of 3
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

2

further notice.

As to Plaintiff’s Motion, it is unclear whether Plaintiff is

entitled to more information than is available in the administrative

record, which has not been filed. The parties’ February 28, 2005,

Joint Status Conference Statement indicated that Defendant MetLife

would produce the administrative record, but did not state when this

would occur. (Jt. Statement at p.3, ln.25-26.) Since Plaintiff’s

Motion indicates that MetLife had not produced the administrative

record (Pl.’s Mot. at p.3, ln.18-19), Defendant MetLife shall file a

copy of the administrative record on or before September 16, 2005. 

Plaintiff’s Motion is deemed withdrawn because it is unclear whether

Plaintiff is entitled to discovery other than what is in the

administrative record.

As to the stipulated changes to the Status Order, the

parties’ proposed modifications are unworkable. But to accommodate

the parties desire to have time to attempt to resolve this action in

private mediation, the Status Order is modified as follows:

1. The last hearing date for motions seeking leave to

conduct additional discovery is November 7, 2005, at 9:00 a.m.

2. The last hearing date for motions is February 13, 2006,

at 9:00 a.m.

3. The final pretrial conference shall be held on 

April 3, 2006, at 3:30 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 6, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01947-GEB -KJM Document 11 Filed 06/07/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

Case 2:04-cv-01947-GEB -KJM Document 11 Filed 06/07/05 Page 3 of 3
#### John Leathers *versus*Joshua W. Carr.

Where the plaintiff sets out specially the circumstances of his case in air action of trespass, it may, under the provisions of the st. 1835, c. 178, be regarded as an action of trespass or of the case.

When mutual accounts exist, the balance, only can bo protected for the benefit of an assignee of one of the parties.

If an officer has cross executions put into his hands, wherein the creditor in one. is debtor in the other, and ho is requested to set off one against the other, he must make the set-off, if the law allows it, or lie will render himself liable.

But if there bo reasonable apprehension of danger in proceeding to act, tile oflicer may require an indemnity from the consequences attendant upon making such sot-oif.

Trespass against the late sheriff of this county for the acts of one of his deputies.

The facts in the case, and the grounds taken in defence, appear in the opinion of the Court.

*J. Appleton,*for the defendant.

*J. Crosby,*for the plaintiff,

cited st. 1835, c. 178, § l, respecting trespass and case ; *Bradley*v. *Davis,*14 Maine R. 44; 6 Bac. Abr. 561.

The opinion of the Court was drawn up by

Whitman C. J.

This is an action of trespass, against the defendant as sheriff of this county, for the default of one of *352his deputies in not setting off an execution in favor of the plaintiff, against one Clark, in satisfaction of one, which Clark had obtained against him, then in the hands of the deputy. For this injury it is contended that trespass does not lie. The plaintiff, however, has set out the circumstances of his case specially ; and our statute has provided, that an action of trespass may be treated as an action of the case and *vice versa.*The special circumstances being set out, therefore, the action may be regarded as of the case, and it becomes unnecessary to determine whether trespass would lie or not.

It is objected, in behalf of the deputy, that the execution in favor of Clark had been assigned to a third person; but it appears that both of the demands had existed between the parties long anterior to the assignment. In such case one demand could not be so assigned as to affect the right of set-off on the part of the creditor in the other. This is an equitable right which the law protects, and will enforce.

It is next objected, that officers cannot be expected to know, when a demand appears to have been assigned, that it is not good against the claim of the debtor to have his cross demand set off against it. It may be that officers may find themselves in some degree of perplexity, occasionally, in reference to the rights of the parties in such cases ; but when they do, if their apprehensions of danger from proceeding, shall appear to be reasonable, security may be required to indemnify them from the consequences of their proceeding to act; and if they shall refuse to act upon being so indemnified they must do it at their peril; and so also if they refuse to act without giving notice of such reasonable apprehension of danger to the injury of the creditor. According to the agreement of the parties the defendant must be defaulted.
#### Donald Parie BROWER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. James M. TURPIN, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 01-6048.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 12, 2001.

Decided April 18, 2001.

Donald Parie Brower, pro se.

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Donald Parie Brower appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 Ú.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp.2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Brower v. Turpin,*No. CA-00-510-5-F (E.D.N.C. July 14, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
##### 



EXHIBIT
10.40
 IRWIN COMMERCIAL FINANCE CORPORATION
2005 NOTICE OF STOCK OPTION GRANT
 JOSEPH LaLEGGIA
 ICF
Shareholder Agreement Option Company
 Date of Grant:
    
    December 23, 2005Company Board Approval Date:
    
    December 20, 2005Exercise Price Per Share:
    
    $23,158 per shareTotal Number of Shares Granted:
    
    45.02 sharesEnd of Term/Expiration Date:
    
    5:00 p.m. EST on December 31, 2009Exercise:
    
    This Option is immediately exercisable by
the Optionee.
Before the First Division,

January 2, 1943

No. 47868.

#### Protests 22305-K, etc., of Pacific Customs Brokerage Co. (Portland, Maine).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

It was stipulated thaf" 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 *365the tax imposed should have been assessed on the basis of the condition in which the lumber was imported and that no addition should have been made for planing, tonguing, and/or grooving. Protests sustained to that extent.
**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 Atlas America Public #12-2003 Limited
Partnership (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31,
2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the “Report”), I, Nancy J. McGurk, Chief Financial Officer of the Managing
General Partner, 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 results of operations of the
      Partnership.
   By:
    /s/
      Nancy J. McGurkName:
    Nancy
      J. McGurkTitle:
    Chief
      Financial OfficerDate:
    May
      16, 2005
 
  17
Before the Second Division,

February 21, 1950

No. 54051.

#### Louis Meyers & Son, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 821552-G, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Bao, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of fabric the same in all material respects as the fabric of which the gloves the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333) were made. The claim of the plaintiff was therefore sustained.
# C_2007161EN.01003701.xml

| 13.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/37

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the maximum design speed of and load platforms for wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors (Codified version)

COM(2006) 667 final — 2006/0219 (COD)

(2007/C 161/09)

On 22 November 2006, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 7 February 2007. The rapporteur was Mr Burns.

At its 434th plenary session, held on 14 and 15 March 2007 (meeting of 14 March), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 151 votes with 6 abstentions.

| 1. | The purpose of the proposal is to undertake the codification of Council Directive 74/152/EEC of 4 March 1974 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the maximum design speed of and load platforms for wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The purpose of the proposal is to undertake the codification of Council Directive 74/152/EEC of 4 March 1974 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the maximum design speed of and load platforms for wheeled agricultural or forestry tractors.

| 2. | The Committee considers the codification of all texts in a single directive to be very useful. It has been assured that this codification contains no substantial change and its sole purpose is to render Community legislation clear and transparent. The Committee fully endorses this objective and, having received the above-mentioned assurance, welcomes the proposal. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Committee considers the codification of all texts in a single directive to be very useful. It has been assured that this codification contains no substantial change and its sole purpose is to render Community legislation clear and transparent. The Committee fully endorses this objective and, having received the above-mentioned assurance, welcomes the proposal.

Brussels, 14 March 2007.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

---
(Reap. Dec. 8512)

#### James Loudon *&*Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 20065; 7100.

(Decided January 12, 1956)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiff.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Olivee, Chief Judge:

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

> It is hereby stipulated as follows concerning the merchandise referred to below:

> 1) The merchandise covered by these appeals consists of fuses imported from Switzerland.

> 2) At the time of exportation no foreign value, export value, nor United States value existed for such or similar merchandise, and the cost of production thereof was 87.93 Swiss francs per thousand pieces, said cost being comprised of the following:

> a) Material and fabrication_65.14

> b) Usual general expenses_ 14 83

> c) Packing_ . 22

> d) Profit__ 7.74

> 87. 93

> 3)Upon this stipulation the appeals enumerated above may be deemed to be submitted, and to be abandoned as to all other merchandise.

On the agreed facts I find the cost of production, as that value, is defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper *500basis for the determination of the value of the fuses here involved, and that such value was 87.93 Swiss francs per thousand pieces.

The appeals having been abandoned insofar as they relate to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeals are hereby dismissed. Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Before the First Division,

November 1, 1951

No. 55957.

protests 18813-K, etc. (New York).

#### Henry Amdur & Sons, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
**Exhibit 32.B**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**

**OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2007, ofEl Paso Exploration & Production Company (the “Company”) as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dane E. Whitehead, SeniorVice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify (i) that the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.
|        | * * | */s/ Dane E. Whitehead*                           |
|--------|----------|---------------------------------------------------|
|   |     | Dane E. Whitehead                                 |
|   |     | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|   |     | (Principal Financial Officer)                     |
|   |     | El Paso Exploration & Production Company      |
|   |     |                                              |
|   |     | May 8, 2007                                  |

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to El Paso Exploration & Production Company and will beretained by El Paso Exploration & Production Company and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
No. 52980.

#### British American Importation Co., Ltd. *v.*United States,

protests 138469-K and 138470-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained. The protests were overruled in all other respects.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Annual Report of Sunway Global Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Liu Bo, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section  
1350 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
                of
                the Securities   Exchange Act of 1934;
                and





(2)
            The
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.





A
      signed
      original 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.





The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of
      Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to
      be
      incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before
      or
      after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in
      such
      filing.





Date:
                July 25, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                Liu BoLiu
                Bo
              Chief
                Executive Officer
              (principal
                executive officer)
No. 56433.

protests 173419-K, etc. (New York).

#### American Roland Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.