alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case No. 7,919.

#### KOHLSAAT v. HOGUET et al.

[4 Ben. 565;1 5 N. B. R. 159.]

District Court, S. D. New York.

Jan., 1871.

Insolvency —Preference — Requisites to Make a Transaction Void.

In order to render a transaction between an insolvent and one of his creditors void, if challenged by the assignee in bankruptcy in due time, sis elements must co-exist: On the part of the debt- or, insolvency, an intent to give a preference, and doing or suffering the thing which works the preference; and, on the part of the creditor, the receiving or being benefited by such thing, the having reasonable cause to believe the insolvency of the debtor, and the having reasonable cause to believe that a preference is intended.

[Cited in Bingham v. Richmond, Case No. 1,-415.]

[Cited in brief in Cook v. Whipple,' 55 N. Y. 156.]

[This was a suit by John C. Kohlsaat against Henry L. Hoguet and others.]

G. A. Seixas, for plaintiff.

A. Blumensteil, for defendants.

1

 [Reported by Robert D. Benedict, Esq., and here reprinted by permission.]

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

This case comes directly within the decision of this court in the case of In re Black [Case No. 1,457], The debtor, when insolvent, suffered his property to be taken on legal process on behalf of the defendants, as creditors of his, with the intent to give them a preference, and the defendants had, at the time, reasonable cause to believe that he was insolvent, and that the transaction was in fraud of the provisions of the bankruptcy act [of 1867 (14 Stat. 517)], and the transaction took place within four months before the filing of the petition in bankruptcy. It was a fraud on the act, for the debtor to give, and for the defendants to take, the preference, with the intent on the part of the debtor that it should be a preference, the debtor being insolvent, and the defendants having reasonable cause to believe so, and reasonable cause to believe that the debtor intended the preference. The insolvency, the intent to give the preference, and the doing or suffering the thing which works the preference, are the elements on the part of the debtor. The elements on the part of the creditor are, the receiving or being benefited by such thing, the having reasonable causé to believe the insolvency of the debtor, and the having reasonable cause to believe that a preference is intended. These sis elements must co-exist, but nothing else is necessary to make the transaction void, if challenged by the assignee in bankruptcy in due time.

In this case, the defendants obtained the •money which they realized through the legal process, intending to keep it at all events, .and intending to keep it as a preference, if it should be a preference, knowing that it must be a preference, if the debtor should fail to induce the rest of his creditors to take a compromise of fifty cents on the dollar.

The bill alleges sufficient facts to show that the debtor suffered his property to be taken, within the meaning of the act.

There must be a decree for the plaintiff, for the amount received by the defendants, with costs.
No. 58564.

protest 230555-K (New York).

#### Patel, Pein & Hudson, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of hot plate mats of wood the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 57261, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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

SHANGO JAJA GREER, SR.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2505 FCD DAD P

vs.

JODI B. RAFKIN, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

By an order filed September 23, 2005, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed

application to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty days. In addition, plaintiff’s complaint was

dismissed and thirty days’ leave to file an amended complaint was granted. Plaintiff was

cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. 

The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a completed application to

proceed in forma pauperis, has not filed an amended complaint, and has not otherwise responded

to the court’s order. 

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without

prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110 (E.D. Cal. 1997); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

Case 2:04-cv-02505-FCD-DAD Document 4 Filed 11/07/05 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

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written

objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v.

Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: November 4, 2005.

DAD:lg

greer2505.fifp.fta

Case 2:04-cv-02505-FCD-DAD Document 4 Filed 11/07/05 Page 2 of 2
(Reap. Dec. 9505)

#### W. R. Zanes *&*Co. of La., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 2193, etc.

(Decided September 15, 1959)

*Sharretts, Paley*<6 *Carter*for the plaintiff.

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

OltveR, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, relate to certain gangsaws, edgers, and parts and accessories therefor, exported from Germany during the years 1956 and 1957, and entered at the port of New Orleans, La.

Counsel for the respective parties have submitted these appeals for reappraisement on an agreed set of facts, wherein it is established that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is foreign value, as defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and that such statutory value therefor is as set forth in schedule “B,” hereto attached and made a part hereof.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 54687.

#### I. Bauer, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 158024-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

The record establishing that certain items of the merchandise consist of mats composed wholly of sisal fibers, which sisal fibers are-similar in all material respects as the sisal fibers contained in the handbags the-subject of *United States*v. *Goldberg & Seltzer, Inc.*(36 C. C. P. A. 64, C. A. D. 399),. the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
##### 



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 Luminent Mortgage Capital, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Christopher J. Zyda, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:  1.
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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. Date: May 10, 2005 By:
    
    /s/ CHRISTOPHER J. ZYDAChristopher J. ZydaSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Luminent Mortgage Capital, Inc. and will be retained by Luminent Mortgage Capital, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-2100 

JOSEPH THOMAS YUTZY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Respondent - Appellee.

On Appeal from the United States Tax Court.

(Tax Ct. No. 05-14960-L)

Submitted: December 21, 2006 Decided: December 29, 2006

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Thomas Yutzy, Appellant Pro Se. Eileen J. O’Connor,

Assistant Attorney General, Mary Roccapriore Pelletier, UNITED

STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Joseph Thomas Yutzy appeals the tax court’s order

upholding the Commissioner’s determination of a deficiency and

penalty with respect to Yutzy’s 2000 federal income tax liability.

Our review of the record and the tax court’s opinion discloses no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the tax court. Yutzy v. Commissioner, IRS, No. 05-14960-L

(U.S.T.C. July 6, 2006). 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








Exhibit 10.8 


AMENDMENT TO XL GROUP PLC
SUPPLEMENTAL DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


WHEREAS, XL Group plc has petitioned the High Court of Ireland to approve a Scheme of Arrangement under the Irish Companies Act, the effect of which would be to impose a new holding company, incorporated in Bermuda, XL Group Ltd, as the ultimate parent holding company of the XL group of companies (the “Redomestication”); and
WHEREAS, XL Group plc maintains the XL Group plc Supplemental Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to its authority under Article VIII, Paragraph 11 of the Plan, the Board of Directors of XL Group plc wishes to amend the Plan in connection with the Redomestication; 
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
		
	1.
	THAT, the title of the Plan shall be the “XL Group Ltd Supplemental Deferred Compensation Plan.”


		
	2.
	THAT, the Plan shall be amended such that each occurrence of the term “XL Group plc” shall instead refer to “XL Group Ltd”.


		
	3.
	THAT, the definition of “Company” in Article I, Paragraph 10 of the Plan shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows: 


“Company” means XL Group Ltd.
		
	4.
	THAT, subsection (a) of the definition of “Change in Control” in Article I, Paragraph 8 of the Plan shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows: 


(a) any Person or Group acquires stock of the Company that, together with stock held by such Person or Group, constitutes more than 50% of the Total Fair Market Value or total voting power of the stock of the Company. However, if any Person or Group is considered to own more than 50% of the total Fair Market Value or total voting power of the stock of the Company, the acquisition of additional stock by the same Person or Group is not considered to cause a Change in Control of the Company. An increase in the percentage of stock owned by any Person or Group as a result of a transaction in which the Company acquires its stock in exchange for property will be treated as an acquisition of stock for purposes of this subsection. This subsection applies only when there is a transfer of stock of the Company (or issuance of stock of the Company) and stock in the Company remains outstanding after the transaction;
		
	5.
	THAT, the definition of “Participating Employer” in Article I, Paragraph 22 of the Plan shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows:


“Participating Employer” means the Company, XL Capital Ltd, XL Financial Solutions Ltd, XL Insurance (Bermuda) Ltd, XL Re Ltd, XL Investment Management Ltd, XL Life Ltd, XL Services (Bermuda) Ltd, XL Re Latin America Ltd, XL Financial Assurance Ltd, and each other Affiliate that, with the approval of the Administrator, joins the Plan by executing a declaration of joinder.
		
	6.
	THAT, the foregoing amendments shall become effective, and shall be conditioned, upon the consummation of the Redomestication.


		
	7.
	THAT, except as expressly amended hereby, the Plan remains in full force and effect.
Skip to main content
web pages

##### Featured

texts All Texts
latest This Just In
Smithsonian Libraries
FEDLINK (US)
Genealogy
Lincoln Collection
Additional Collections
eBooks & Texts

##### Top

American Libraries
Canadian Libraries
Universal Library
Community Texts
Shareware CD-ROMs
Project Gutenberg
Biodiversity Heritage Library
Open Library

##### 

Children's Library
Library of the Printed Web

##### Featured

movies All Video
latest This Just In
Prelinger Archives
Democracy Now!
Occupy Wall Street
TV NSA Clip Library
TV News

##### Top

Animation & Cartoons
Arts & Music
Community Video
Computers & Technology
Cultural & Academic Films
Ephemeral Films
Movies
Understanding 9/11

##### 

News & Public Affairs
Spirituality & Religion
Sports Videos
Television
Videogame Videos
Vlogs
Youth Media

##### Featured

audio All Audio
latest This Just In
Grateful Dead
Netlabels
Old Time Radio
78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
Live Music Archive

##### Top

Audio Books & Poetry
Community Audio
Computers & Technology
Music, Arts & Culture
News & Public Affairs
Non-English Audio
Podcasts
Librivox Free Audiobook

##### 

Radio Programs
Spirituality & Religion

##### Featured

software All Software
latest This Just In
Old School Emulation
MS-DOS Games
Historical Software
Classic PC Games
Software Library
Internet Arcade

##### Top

Community Software
MS-DOS
Software Sites
APK
Tucows Software Library
Vintage Software
Vectrex
Console Living Room

##### 

Atari 2600
ZX Spectrum
Magnavox Odyssey 2
Bally Astrocade
ZX Spectrum Library: Games
Sega Genesis
Apple Computer

##### Featured

image All Image
latest This Just In
Flickr Commons
Occupy Wall Street Flickr
Cover Art
USGS Maps
Metropolitan Museum

##### Top

NASA Images
Solar System Collection
Ames Research Center
Brooklyn Museum

##### 

-  web 
-  texts 
-  movies 
-  audio 
-  software 
-  image 
- logo
-                                                                                     Toggle navigation                                                                                                                                               - ABOUT
  - CONTACT
  - BLOG
  - PROJECTS
  - HELP
  - DONATE
  - TERMS
  - JOBS
  - VOLUNTEER
  - PEOPLE 
-  search                                                                   Search the Archive                                                                                                            
-   
-  upload 
-  personSIGN IN 

Internet Archive's Wayback Machine

Loading...

https://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/lapp/lapplbidf.pdf | 11:08:09 Feb 2, 2017

Got an HTTP 301 response at crawl time

Redirecting to...

https://www.epa.gov/airtoxics/lapp/lapplbidf.pdf

Impatient?

The Wayback Machine is an initiative of the Internet Archive, a 501(c)(3) non-profit, building a digital library of Internet sites and other cultural artifacts in digital form.Other projects include Open Library & archive-it.org.

Your use of the Wayback Machine is subject to the Internet Archive's Terms of Use.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 14, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 11817]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4544]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 07-805; MB Docket No. 05-132; RM-11217]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Junction, Melvin, and Menard, TX

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The staff approves the withdrawal of a petition for rulemaking 
in this FM allotment rulemaking proceeding See SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew J. Rhodes, Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MB Docket No. 05-132, adopted February 21, 2007, and 
released February 23, 2007. The full text of this Commission decision 
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also 
be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and 
Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, 
Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or http://www.BCPIWEB.com.
    In response to a rulemaking petition filed by Charles Crawford, the 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposed the allotment of Channel 242A at 
Melvin, Texas. To accommodate this allotment, it also proposed the 
substitution of Channel 292A for vacant Channel 242A at Menard, Texas, 
and the substitution of Channel 224A for vacant Channel 292A at 
Junction, Texas. The withdrawal of the petition for rulemaking complies 
with Section 1.420(j) of the Commission's rules because the rulemaking 
petitioner is not receiving any money or other consideration in return 
for the withdrawal. See 70 FR 19398 (April 13, 2005).
    This document is not subject to the Congressional Review Act. (The 
Commission, is, therefore, not required to submit a copy of this Report 
and Order to GAO, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) because the petition for rulemaking was dismissed).

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.
 [FR Doc. E7-4544 Filed 3-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Before the First Division,

May 20, 1953.

No. 57334.

protest 77535-K (New York).

#### Eitinger Bead Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beads similar íd all material respects to those the subject of *Gerstenzang Werner Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 97, C. D. 1136), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before the First Division,

February 17, 1944

No. 49206.

#### Protest 80927-K of American Merchandise Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

This case was inadvertently abandoned by counsel and rehearing was granted. In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the atomizers in question are similar in all material respects to those involved in Abstract 44140 the claim at 60 percent under paragraph 218 (f) was sustained.
Before the First Division,

May 12, 1960

No. 64173.

protests 58/10098, etc. (Seattle).

#### Max Eckardt & Sons et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beads the same in all material respects as those the subject of *United States*v. *S. H. Kress & Co.*(46 C.C.P.A. 135, C.A.D. 716), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4695 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4695

           To repeal the District of Columbia Home Rule Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 11 (legislative day, July 10), 2024

 Mr. Lee (for himself, Ms. Lummis, and Mrs. Blackburn) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
               Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To repeal the District of Columbia Home Rule Act.

    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 ``Bringing Oversight to Washington and 
Safety to Every Resident Act'' or the ``BOWSER Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HOME RULE ACT.

    Effective on the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (Public Law 93-198; 87 
Stat. 774) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Lpath, Inc. (the “Corporation”) onForm 10-Q for the period ended September 30,2008 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, ScottR. Pancoast, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

 

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

 

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

 
| Date:  November 13, 2008 |                                        |
|-------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|
|                          | /s/  Scott R. Pancoast                      |
|                          | Scott  R. Pancoast                          |
|                          | President  and Chief Executive Officer      |
|                          |                                        |
|                          | /s/  Gary J.G. Atkinson                     |
|                          | Gary  J.G. Atkinson                         |
|                          | Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Lpath, Inc.and will be retained by Lpath, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

This certificationaccompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated byreference into any filing of Lpath, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933,as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether madebefore or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any generalincorporation language contained in such filing.

 

----