alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 8690)

Entry Nos. 798521; 839974.

#### Universal Sales Company *v.*United States

(Decided October 24, 1956)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiff.

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

Wilson, Judge:

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

> *544It is hereby stipulated as follows concerning the merchandise referred to below:

> 1) The merchandise herein consists of monosodium glutamate, known as Ajinomoto and imported in drums from Japan. On or about the date of exportation, such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan, either for home consumption or for export to the United States, but at that time was freely offered for sale in the United States for domestic consumption as defined in section 402 (e), Tariff Act of 1930, at the following price: $122.60 per drum, including the cost of drums at $5 each.

> 2) Upon this stipulation the appeals may be deemed to be submitted for decision.

On the agreed facts I find the United States value, as that value is defined in section 402 (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended bisection 8 of the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value was $122.60 per drum, including the cost of drums at $5 each.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
No. 62583.

#### Distilled Brands, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 320465-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited, it was held that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protests were sustained to this extent.
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT (21)

                           Subsidiaries of Registrant

Name:                     Kleinert's, Inc. of Alabama

State of Incorporation:   Alabama

Trading as:               Kleinert's, Inc. of Alabama

Name:                     Kleinert's, Inc. of Delaware

State of Incorporation:   Delaware

Trading as:               Kleinert's, Inc. of Delaware

Name:                     Kleinert's, Inc. of New York

State of Incorporation:   New York

Trading as:               Kleinert's, Inc. of New York

Name:                     Kleinert's, Inc. of Florida

State of Incorporation:  Florida

Trading as:              Kleinert's, Inc. of Florida

Name:                    Certified Apparel Services of Honduras, Inc.

State of Incorporation:  Honduras, CA.

Trading as:              Certified Apparel Services of Honduras, Inc.
Before the Third Division,

July 5, 1939

No. 41785.

#### Protests 760372-G(H), etc., of Paolo Alonge & Bro. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 40880 it was held that an allowance should have been made in the weight of the cheese to compensate for the inedible covering on the outside.
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

Stipulation to Stay Action While the Parties Discuss Settlement

1

BILL LOCKYER

Attorney General of the State of California

JAMES M. HUMES

Chief Assistant Attorney General

FRANCES T. GRUNDER

Senior Assistant Attorney General

DAVID A. CARRASCO

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

BARBARA A. MORRIS, State Bar No. 137680

Deputy Attorney General

1300 I Street, Suite 125

P.O. Box 944255

Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Telephone: (916) 322-3870

Fax: (916) 324-5205

Attorneys for Defendant Runnels

SA2005300167

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BYRON L. SCOTT,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT,

et al.,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 2:04-cv-02586-LKK-GGH (P)

STIPULATION TO STAY ACTION

WHILE THE PARTIES DISCUSS

SETTLEMENT 

Plaintiff Byron Scott, Plaintiff in Propria Persona, and Defendant David Runnels, by

and through his attorneys of record, hereby stipulate that this case be stayed until July 21, 2006

while the parties continue to explore the possibility of settling this action. 

During Plaintiff’s deposition at High Desert State Prison on April 28, 2006, the parties

discussed the possibility of settling this action, and believe that further settlement discussions

might be fruitful.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:04-cv-02586-LKK -GGH Document 49 Filed 05/26/06 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

27

28

Stipulation to Stay Action While the Parties Discuss Settlement

2

Under this stipulation, Defendant’s opposition to Plaintiff’s pending motion for

summary judgment will be due on July 21, 2006 and Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s pending

discovery requests will be due on June 21, 2006.

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

(original signature retained by 

 attorney Barbara A. Morris)

Dated: May 11 , 2006 /s/ Byron Scott 

 

BYRON SCOTT

Plaintiff In Propria Persona

(original signature retained by 

 attorney Barbara A. Morris)

Dated: May 16 , 2006 _____________________________________ /s/ Barbara A. Morris

BARBARA A. MORRIS

Deputy Attorney General for

Defendant D. Runnels

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, Defendant Runnels shall have up to and including

July 21, 2006, in which to file his opposition to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and

shall have until June 21, 2006, to respond to Plaintiff’s pending discovery requests.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 5/25/06 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

_________________________________

HON. GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

United States Magistrate Judge

sc2586.sta.wpd

Case 2:04-cv-02586-LKK -GGH Document 49 Filed 05/26/06 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 99.1

  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solely for the purposes of complying with Section 1, U.S.C., 1950, I, the
undersigned Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of M.B.A.
Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended October 31,
2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the
Company.

Dated: January 22, 2003

                                        By /s/ Gaylen M. Brotherson
                                           --------------------------------
                                           Gaylen M. Brotherson
                                           Chairman of the Board and
                                           Chief Executive Officer
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 07-726 

________________________________________________________________________ 

DEFENSE 

Cooperation 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

And GREECE 

Signed at Athens and Fort Belvoir 

May 25 and July 26, 2007 

with 

Annexes 

 and 

Agreement Amending the 

Agreement 

Signed at Athens and Fort Belvoir 

February 23 and July 5, 2011 
 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.” 
 GREECE 

 Defense: Cooperation 

 Agreement signed at Athens and Fort Belvoir 

 May 25 and July 26, 2007; 

 Entered into force July 26, 2007. 

 With annexes. 

 And agreement amending the agreement. 

 Signed at Athens and Fort Belvoir 

 February 23 and July 5, 2011; 

 Entered into force July 5, 2011. 







NOTE: There are six Articles in this Agreement.








NOTE: It is noted that some page numbers appear to be out of sequence with text on pages.
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.12
                                                                   -------------
                                  AMENDMENT TO

                       1992 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

VOTED:  That Keane, Inc.'s 1992 Employee Stock Purchase Plan be and hereby is
        amended by inserting a new Section 5.5 (Full Funding Upon a Change in
        Control) as set forth below:

        "4.  Offerings.

        The Plan will be implemented by consecutive semi-annual offerings
        (referred to herein collectively as "Offerings" and individually as an
        "Offering"). Offerings will begin each January 1 and July 1, or the
        first business day thereafter. The Board of Directors may, at its
        discretion, chooses a different offering period of twelve (12) months or
        less for subsequent Offerings. Participation in any one or more of the
        Offerings under the Plan shall neither limit, nor require, participation
        in any other Offering."


                                    Adopted by the Board of
                                    Directors of Keane, Inc. on
                                    February 15, 2001
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

DAVID MARSHALL GATES,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2632 MCE JFM P

vs.

WARDEN MARSHALL, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a

petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order filed April 1, 2005,

petitioner’s original petition was dismissed pursuant to Rule 2(c), Rules Governing § 2254

Cases, for failure to specify the grounds for relief in his petition and petitioner was granted thirty

days to file an amended petition. On April 29, 2005, petitioner filed an amended petition. The

amended petition is essentially unintelligible. Good cause appearing, petitioner will be given one

final opportunity to amend his petition to present claims for relief cognizable in this federal

habeas corpus action.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s amended petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with leave

to amend within thirty days from the date of this order;

Case 2:04-cv-02632-MCE-JFM Document 6 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

2

2. Any second amended petition must bear the case number assigned to this

action and the title “Second Amended Petition”; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner the court’s form for

application for writ of habeas corpus. 

DATED: June 3, 2005.

12/kf

gate2632.114sec 

Case 2:04-cv-02632-MCE-JFM Document 6 Filed 06/03/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 54706.

#### D. Hauser *v.*United States,

protests 127544-K, 127545-K, and 127538-K (Tampa).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of sugar sirup the same in all material respects as that the subject of *United States*v. *Olavarria & Co., Inc.*(37 C. C. P. A. 40, C. A. D. 417) and that the total sugars contained in each of the involved entries are as set forth in the United States analyst's reports attached to said entries, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 55917.

protests 167444-K, 168527-K, and 170004-K (New York).

#### B. Westergaard & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cheese knives similar in all material respects to those the subject of *B. Westergaard & Co.*v. *United States*(26 Cust. Ct. 77, C. D. 1302), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 31.2
 Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
      (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 (b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
 (c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and
 (d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an Annual Report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 (b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
  /s/ Mark J. DeCesarisMark J. DeCesarisActing Chief Financial 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CASEY JOSEPH CICERO, No. 2:04-cv-2519-MCE-PAN-P

Petitioner, 

v. ORDER

William Duncan,

Respondent. 

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has timely

filed a notice of appeal of this court's January 6, 2006, denial

of his application for a writ of habeas corpus. Before

petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of

appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P.

22(b).

A certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253 “only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

///

Case 2:04-cv-02519-MCE -PAN Document 20 Filed 02/14/06 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

The court must either issue a certificate of appealability

indicating which issues satisfy the required showing or must

state the reasons why such a certificate should not issue. Fed.

R. App. P. 22(b).

For the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s November

29, 2005, findings and recommendations, petitioner has not made a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 

Accordingly, a certificate of appealability should not issue in

this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: February 13, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-02519-MCE -PAN Document 20 Filed 02/14/06 Page 2 of 2
1151 Duryea Ave. Irvine CA, 92614

Month of: (Insert Month)

Replace Repair Upgrade Required No Action

Replace Repair Upgrade Required No Action

Replace Repair Upgrade Required No Action

Replace Repair Upgrade Required No Action

Replace Repair Upgrade Required No Action

Replace Repair Upgrade Required No Action

Replace Repair Upgrade Required No Action

Replace Repair Upgrade Required No Action

Note:

(1) Maintenance is checked and logged every 1st and 15th of the month.

(Insert Name)

xx/xx/xxxx

xx/xx/xxxx

xx/xx/xxxx

Maintenance Date(s) Action Conducted

xx/xx/xxxx (Insert Issue Description & Maintenance Coducted)

Initial

(Initial)

xx/xx/xxxx

1. Software Updates

2. Airframe

3. Motors

4. Propellers

xx/xx/xxxx

Unmanned Aircraft System 

8. Other:

5. Camera Gimbal

6. Landing Gear

7. Vibration Dampening

Unmanned Aircraft Maintenance Log (1)

xx/xx/xxxx

xx/xx/xxxx

Notes Performed By:
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 47 

To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 to modify a 

provision relating to acquisition of beach fill. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 24 (legislative day, JANUARY 3), 2023 

Mr. RUBIO introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 

to modify a provision relating to acquisition of beach fill. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Sand Acquisition, 

5 Nourishment, and Development Act of 2023’’ or the 

6 ‘‘SAND Act of 2023’’. 

7 SEC. 2. ACQUISITION OF BEACH FILL. 

8 Section 935 of the Water Resources Development Act 

9 of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2299) is amended by striking ‘‘if such 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 47 IS

1 materials are not available from domestic sources for envi2 ronmental or economic reasons’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
No. 49675.

#### Protest 722161-G of Nippon Dry Goods Co. (San Francisco).

*273Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that certain of the merchandise is in all material'respects the same as that passed upon in *United States*v. *Nippon Import & Trading Co.*(30 C. C. P. A. 89, C. A. D. 220). In accordance therewith the protest was sustained to this extent.

Lawrence, J., not participating.
No. 58057.

protests 191266-K, 205195-K, and 208532-K (New York).

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

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the issue herein is similar in all material respects to that involved in *United States*v. *Washington State Liquor Control Board*(34 C. C. P. A. 118, C. A. D. 352) and that the merchandise, consisting of 108.80 meters of silk piece goods missing from case 5071/3 in protest 191266-K, 166 meters of silk piece goods missing from case 5233/125 in protest 205195-K, and all of the contents of case 7112/1, with the exception of two 5-piece linen sets, items 4245/203 and 3883/203, in protest 208532-K, was not in fact imported. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited, as well as that in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351), it was held that duty is not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were missing from cases 5071/3, 5233/125, and 7112/1. The protests were sustained to this extent.
Attachment I

Re: Final Performance Report (FPR) and SF 425 Federal Financial Report (FFR) for Graduate 

Assistance of Areas in National Need (GAANN) Grant Number XXXX

Dear Project Director:

In accordance with Section 75.118 of the Education Department General Administrative Regulations 

(EDGAR) and Section 648.66 of the GAANN Program Regulations, recipients of a GAANN grant are 

required to submit a FPR and FFR 90 days after the expiration of a the grant. Starting XXXX, the 

FPR online system will be available for you to input and submit your FPR. You will receive 

additional information needed to access the system when it opens

Please note that the deadline for submitting the FPR is XXXX.

The FFR, also called the SF 425, must be submitted to this office by XXXX. Please have your grants 

and contracts office, or the appropriate office email this document to XXXX.

Please be aware that failure to submit either the Final Performance Report or the SF 425 in a timely

manner will result in your grant being closed in non-compliance and may jeopardize any future 

funding requests submitted by your institution.

If you have any questions, please contact XXXX or XXXX or by e-mail at 

OPE_GAANN_Program@ed.gov. 

Sincerely,

XXXX
Exhibit 10.13.6


 





CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED


 


 


AMENDMENT NUMBER FIVE TO GOOGLE SERVICES
AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment Number
Five to the Google Services Agreement (“Amendment”) is effective as of August 1, 2014 (“Amendment
Effective Date”), and amends the Google Services Agreement by and between Synacor, Inc. (“Company”)
and Google Inc. (“Google”) with an effective date of March 1, 2011, as amended (the “Agreement”).
Capitalized terms not defined in this Amendment have the meanings given to those terms in the Agreement. The parties agree as follows:


 


		1.	Additional Definitions. The following are
added as new Sections 1.31-1.36:



 


“1.31 ‘[*]
AFS Ads’ means AFS Ads that are displayed in response to Search Queries submitted by End Users [*].


 


1.32  ‘[*] AFS Ads’
means AFS Ads displayed in response to Search Queries submitted by End Users [*].


 


1.33 [*]


 


1.34 [*]


 


1.35  ‘[*] AFS Ads’
means AFS Ads displayed in response to Search Queries submitted by End Users [*].”


 


1.36 [*]


 


		2.	Implementation and Maintenance. Sections
2.2(d) and 2.2(e) are deleted in their entirety and replaced by the following:



 


“2.2(d) Subject to
Section 2.3 [*], Company will ensure that (i) every Search Query generates a WS Request, (ii) every Request is generated
by a Search Query and (iii) every Request contains the Search Query that generated that Request.


 


2.2(e) For each AFS Request,
Company will request at least [*] wide format [*] AFS Ads, [*].”


 


		3.	AFS Search Queries. Section 2.3 is deleted
in its entirety and replaced with the following:



 


“2.3. [*]


 


		4.	Exhibit B. Exhibit B is deleted in its
entirety and replaced with Exhibit B attached to this Amendment.



 


		5.	General. The parties may execute this Amendment
in counterparts, including facsimile, PDF, or other electronic copies, which taken together will constitute one instrument. Except
as expressly modified herein, the terms of the Agreement remain in full force and effect.



 


 


[*] = CERTAIN INFORMATION HAS BEEN OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY
WITH THE COMMISSION. CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT HAS BEEN REQUESTED WITH RESPECT TO THE OMITTED PORTIONS.



    	 



    	 



    

 


CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED


 


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment
by persons duly authorized.


 


 


	GOOGLE	 	SYNACOR, INC.
	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Nikesh Arora	 	By:	/s/ Scott Bailey
	Name:	Nikesh Arora	 	Name:	Scott Bailey
	Title:	President, Global Sales and Business Development	 	Title:	Chief Operating Officer
	Date:	August 15, 2014	 	Date:	August 15, 2014



 






    	 



    	 



    

CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT REQUESTED


 


 


EXHIBIT B


AFS Revenue Share Percentage


 


[*]


 


 


[*] = CERTAIN INFORMATION HAS BEEN OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY
WITH THE COMMISSION. CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT HAS BEEN REQUESTED WITH RESPECT TO THE OMITTED PORTIONS.