alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 53004.

#### Van Gelder-Fanto Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 144734-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of ox gall or sheep gall the same in all material respects as the substance passed upon in *G. D. Searle & Co*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 112, C. D. 1138). The claim for free entry under paragraph 1669 was therefore sustained.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 07-803 

________________________________________________________________________ 

TELECOMMUNICATION 

Use of 138-144 MHz Band 

 Protocol Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and MEXICO 

Signed at Mexico City August 3, 2007 

 

 

 with 

 Appendices 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
MEXICO 

Telecommunication: Use of 138-144 MHz Band 

 Protocol signed at Mexico City August 3, 2007; 

 Entered into force August 3, 2007. 

 With appendices.
No. 53037.

#### B. Altman & Co., Ltd., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 605792-G, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

By virtue of the decision in *United States*v. *American Viscose Corporation*(30 C. C. P. A. 240, C. A. D. 239), the protests were dismissed.
---

---

# Exhibit 4.(a).60.5



The State of Israel
Ministry of Communications

General License of Partner Fixed Communications Solutions Limited
Partnership for the Provision of Domestic Fixed-Line
Telecommunication Services

# Amendment No. 5

By virtue of the powers of the
Minister of Communications under Article 4 (e) of the Communications Law
(Telecommunications and Broadcasts), 5742-1982, that have been delegated to us, by all
our other powers under any law and after having considered the request of Partner Fixed
Communications Solutions Limited Partnership for the Provision of Domestic Fixed-Line
Telecommunication Services, (Partner), we hereby amend the General License
for the provision of Domestic Fixed-Line Telecommunication Services, granted toPartneron 15 January 2007, as follows:

# Amendment to Appendix B

| | 1. | In
Appendix B, in article 2-List of Services:
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------

| | a. | Instead
of item number 16 shall come:
| | -- | -------------------------------------



|16 | Free Number Service (free dialing) | The initiator of a call to a free number of the subscriber will not be charged for the call; The subscriber receiving the call, is billed for the call. | Immediate | The service will be available to all fixed line and MRT subscribers. The service includes options to block calls from specified areaa and to receive reports of the calls.
|-- | ---------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | b. | Instead
of item no. 17 shall come:
| | -- | ----------------------------------



|17 | Split Charge Service | The initiator of a call to a split charge number of a subscriber is billed at a reduced rate. The recipient of the call is billed for the remaining cost of the call. | Future | Depends on a service file
|-- | -------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | -------------------------

(10
October, 2007)

| |                                        |                                   
| | -------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------
|
|
|
|
| | (sgd)                                  | (sgd)                             
| | ___________________Mordechai Mordechai | ___________________Zeev Raz       
| | Director-General                       | Temporary Deputy Director-General,
| |                                        | Engineering and Licensing         



---

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1995
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>             6,458
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>            3,527
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>              3,649
<EQUITIES>                         863
<MORTGAGE>                       1,049
<REAL-ESTATE>                       77
<TOTAL-INVEST>                  13,168
<CASH>                             122
<RECOVER-REINSURE>               1,450
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>             835
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  16,478
<POLICY-LOSSES>                 12,433
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                 34
<POLICY-OTHER>                      54
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>              201
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                    563
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               50
<PREFERRED>                          0
<COMMON>                            89
<OTHER-SE>                       2,067
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    16,478
<PREMIUMS>                         810
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                541
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                  49
<OTHER-INCOME>                     170
<BENEFITS>                         842
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>         28
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>               (94)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    381
<INCOME-TAX>                       125
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                255
<DISCONTINUED>                      19
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0
<CHANGES>                            0
<NET-INCOME>                       274
<EPS-PRIMARY>                     3.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                     3.80
<RESERVE-OPEN>                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>              0
        

</TABLE>
# C_2007088EN.01001901.xml

| 21.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 88/19 |
| --------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | ------- |

---

Winding-up proceedings

Decision to open winding-up proceedings in respect of ‘Centro Asegurador, Compañía de seguros y reaseguros, S.A.’

Publication made in accordance with Article 14 of Directive 2001/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of insurance undertakings.

(2007/C 88/07)

| Insurance undertaking | ‘Centro Asegurador, Compañía de seguros y reaseguros, S.A.’ C/ Velázquez, 157 E-28002 Madrid | ‘Centro Asegurador, Compañía de seguros y reaseguros, S.A.’ | C/ Velázquez, 157 | E-28002 Madrid |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------- | -------------- |
| ‘Centro Asegurador, Compañía de seguros y reaseguros, S.A.’ | | | | |
| C/ Velázquez, 157 | | | | |
| E-28002 Madrid | | | | |
| Date, entry into force and nature of the decision | 28 November 2006
28 November 2006
Judicial decree | | | |
| Competent authorities | Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 2 de Madrid Gran Via, 52 E-28013 Madrid Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones Paseo de la Castellana, 44 E-28046 Madrid | Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 2 de Madrid | Gran Via, 52 | E-28013 Madrid |
| Juzgado de lo Mercantil no 2 de Madrid | | | | |
| Gran Via, 52 | | | | |
| E-28013 Madrid | | | | |
| Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones | | | | |
| Paseo de la Castellana, 44 | | | | |
| E-28046 Madrid | | | | |
| Supervisory authority | Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones Paseo de la Castellana, 44 E-28046 Madrid | Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones | Paseo de la Castellana, 44 | E-28046 Madrid |
| Dirección General de Seguros y Fondos de Pensiones | | | | |
| Paseo de la Castellana, 44 | | | | |
| E-28046 Madrid | | | | |
| Liquidator appointed | Concepción Bermúdez, Javier Santos y Gonzalo Clemente (Administración concursal) Paseo de la Castellana, 32 E-28046 Madrid E-mail: actividadliquidadora@consorseguros.es | Concepción Bermúdez, Javier Santos y Gonzalo Clemente (Administración concursal) | Paseo de la Castellana, 32 | E-28046 Madrid |
| Concepción Bermúdez, Javier Santos y Gonzalo Clemente (Administración concursal) | | | | |
| Paseo de la Castellana, 32 | | | | |
| E-28046 Madrid | | | | |
| E-mail: actividadliquidadora@consorseguros.es | | | | |
| Applicable law | Ley 22/2003, de 9 de julio, Concursal
Consolidated text of the Private Insurance Supervisory Act, approved by Royal Legislative Decree 6/2004 of 29 October 2004.
Spain | | | |

---
EXHIBIT  99.1


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


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December
31, 2002 of MNS Eagle Equity Group, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"),
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Annual Report"), I Stephen M. Siedow, Chief Executive Officer, President and
Chief Financial Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     1. The Annual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     2. The information contained in this Annual Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of the operation of the
Company.


Date: March 14, 2003                 /s/ Stephen M. Siedow
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                         Stephen M. Siedow, Chief Executive
                                         Officer, President and
                                         Chief Financial Officer
(Reap. Dec. 10767)

#### Armour and Company *v.*United States

Entry No. 776714-1, etc.

(Decided June 3, 1964)

*Jolm D. Rode*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Donlon, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, attached to and made a part of this decision, have been submitted for decision on the following stipulation of counsel for the parties r

> XT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the Plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise and issues in the appeals listed above are the same in all material respects as those in *United States*v. *International Packers, Limited,*48 C.C.P.A. (Customs) 80, C.A.D. 769 and the record in that case may be incorporated herein;

> That the involved merchandise was imported prior to the effective date, February 27,1958, of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956.

> That at the dates of exportation of the merchandise involved in these appeals from Argentina, the country of exportation, to wit, Sept. 20, 1956,- Eeb. 14, 1957, Eeb. 14,1957, and Jan. 3,1957 such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Argentina for home consumption or for export to the United States.

> That United States value as defined in Section 402(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended for such merchandise at the date of exportation thereof from Argentina was as follows:

> Eor merchandise involved in Appeal No. 292756-A/06530, $2.5885 per dozen tins net packed.

> For the merchandise involved in Appeals No. R58/7649/02939; NO'. R58/7650/ 02940 and No. 58/7654/02944, $15.8987 per dozen tins net packed.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeals for re-appraisement listed above may be submitted for decision on this stipulation.

Accepting this stipulation as an agreed statement of facts and on the authority of the decision cited therein, I find and hold that United *583States value, as defined in section 402(e) of tbe Tariff Act of 1930, as effective on tbe dates tbe merchandise was entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, is tbe proper basis for determination of tbe value of tbe canned meat products^ exported from Argentina, described on the invoices of tbe entries covered by the appeals for reappraisement set forth in schedule A, and for tbe respective entries of such merchandise, such values, per dozen tins, net, packed, are as listed in said schedule A. . .

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
(Reap. Dec. 10754)

#### Manhattan Novelty Corp. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 848441; 764856.

(Decided May 12, 1964)

*Lane, Young & Fox*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Ford, Judge:

The two appeals for reappraisement listed above have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, hy and between counsel for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the above appeals for reappraisement consists of radio sets exported from Japan subsequent to February 27,1958.

> That the radio sets are not identified in the Final List published by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54521, effective after February 27, 1958; and that the merchandise involved herein was entered for consumption subsequent to February 27, 1958.

> *560That on or about the date of exportation of the said merchandise, the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold, or, in the absence of sales, offered for sale in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was the appraised value, less the item designated on the invoices as “Buyer’s Commission” in the amount shown thereon.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the above appeals for reappraisement may be submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

Accepting this stipulation as a statement of facts, I find that the involved merchandise is not listed on the final list of articles published in T.D. 54521, effective on or after February 27,1958, and that export value, as that value is defined in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, and T.D. 54521, effective on or after February 27, 1958, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and I hold that such statutory value is the appraised value, less the item designated on the invoices as “Buyer’s Commission,” in the amount shown thereon.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated November 2, 2016, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-213459) of Smart Trust 278,
comprising Smart Trust, Healthcare Innovations Trust, Series 2.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


November 2, 2016
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:**UnitedStates Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff practice and procedure digest
 
digest14 |digest15 |digest16
 
SuDoc Number:Y 3.N 88:23/0386/
Item Number:1051-H-19 (online)
CGP systemNumber:00898228
March 19, 2019
October 5, 2011 

MEMORANDUM 

From: William H. Maxwell 

EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01) 

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 

Subject: Meeting with Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) 

Attendees: 

Ellen Kurlansky, EPA/OAR/OAA/OPAR 

Joel Beauvais, EPA/OGC/IO 

Kellie Ortega, EPA/OECA/OCE/AED 

David Godfrey, Western Electricity Coordinating Council 

Rachel Sherard, Western Electricity Coordinating Council 

Discussion: 

A general discussion was held of the proposed Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) and 

WECC’s ideas on reliability in the west as EPA implements its electricity sector rules.
Exhibit 10.1







LEASE AGREEMENT












This Lease is made this 1st day of January, 2015 by and between Mobile Safety Innovations, LLC (hereinafter "Landlord") and OILFIELD SAFETY HOLDINGS INC. (hereinafter "Tenant"). In consideration for the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereby agree as follows:



1. The Landlord subleases to the Tenant and the Tenant rents from the Landlord the following described premises: office space located at 1507 N. 1st Street, McAlester Oklahoma 74501.



2. The term of the Lease shall be for one year commencing January 1, 2015 and ending on December 31, 2015.



 3. The Tenant shall pay to Landlord as rent $1,200 per month in advance of moving in.


4. This Lease is subject to all present or future mortgages affecting the premises.



5. Tenant shall use and occupy the 2,000 square feet of warehouse space for office space and assembly work.



6. The Tenant shall not make any alterations, additions or improvements to the premises without the prior written consent of the Landlord.



7. The Landlord, at his own expense, shall furnish the following utilities or amenities for the benefit of the Tenant: Telephones, desks, chairs, copier and conference room usage.



8. The Tenant, at his own expense, shall furnish the following: computers.



9. The Tenant shall not permit or commit waste to the premises.



10. The Tenant shall comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances codes and laws of all governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the premises.



11. The Tenant shall not sublet or assign the premises nor allow any other person or business to use or occupy the premises without the prior written consent of the Landlord, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld.



12. At the end of the term of this Lease, the Tenant shall surrender and deliver up the premises in the same condition (subject to any additions, alterations or improvements, if any) as presently exists, reasonable wear and tear excluded.



 13. Upon default in any term or condition of this Lease, the Landlord shall have the right to undertake any or all other remedies permitted by Law.


 


 



1







14. This Lease shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the parties, their heirs, successors, and assigns.





 Signed this 1st day of January, 2015


	 	 	 
	
 

	
 

	
 


	
 

	
 

	
 


	
Tenant;


OILFIELD SAFETY HOLDINGS INC.


 

	
 

	
Landlord:


 Mobile Safety Innovations, LLC.


 


	
 



/s/ Shawn W. Smoot


Shawn W. Smoot, President

	
 

	
 


/s/ Shawn W. Smoot


Shawn W. Smoot, Managing member




















2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Clarence Jackson, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 647]

—Spain, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigán, J.), rendered August 26, 1994, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the top count of an indictment alleging the sale of cocaine. The plea was in satisfaction of that indictment and another which charged defendant with a similar sale which occurred while the first charge was pending. The plea bargain provided for a prison sentence of 4 to 12 years, unless defendant, in cooperation with the State Police, facilitated an A-II felony cocaine sale by a drug dealer to an undercover State Police investigator. In such event, the sentence would be 3 to 9 years. The sale had to occur within 30 days of the plea and be to the satisfaction of the prosecutor. Defendant was released with warnings that if he failed to return for his scheduled sentencing, the bargain as to the sentence would be off. Defendant failed to appear for sentencing, was thereafter apprehended and sentenced to 4 to 12 years in prison.

After defendant failed to appear for sentencing, defense counsel moved to have the Trial Judge recuse himself. Prior to defendant’s plea, the Judge had contacted the State Police in an effort to confirm the status of a continuing defense counsel representation that defendant was working with the State Police. The claim was being used as a basis to delay the proceedings. Defendant contended that the contact prejudiced the Judge against him and that County Court erred in denying the recusal motion.

Where no legal ground for disqualification exists *(see,*Judiciary Law § 14), it is up to the conscience and discretion of the Trial Judge to determine if recusal is warranted under a given set of circumstances *(see, People v Moreno,*70 NY2d 403). We find no abuse of County Court’s discretion in refusing defendant’s motion for recusal *(see, People v Brunner,*182 AD2d 1123, *lv denied*80 NY2d 828; *People v Webb,*159 AD2d 289, *lv denied*76 NY2d 744). The complained-of conduct was unrelated to the issue of defendant’s guilt, occurred prior to the plea at which time the defense was fully aware of the contact and made no objection, and did not impact the sentence or the conditions to be completed to receive a reduced sentence. It must be noted that defendant did not move to withdraw his plea and does not seek such relief within this appeal.

We find no merit to defendant’s remaining contentions. De*741fendant had an opportunity to explain the circumstances of his failure to appear, as well as his efforts to cooperate and meet the terms of his plea bargain. He failed to do so *(see, People v Outley,*80 NY2d 702). Defense counsel’s conclusory explanation failed to raise an issue of fact requiring further inquiry. We find no abuse of discretion or extraordinary circumstances with defendant’s sentencing, and decline to disturb the sentence imposed.

Cardona, P. J., White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.