alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 51448.

#### Protest 96062-K of F. B. Vandegrift & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise consist of cheese similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Scaramelli*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 270, C. D. 706) and Abstract 48539. In accordance 'therewith and following the decisions cited, wherein the court stated, upon authority of Abstracts 40880. and 41794, that the string surrounding the Provolone cheese was deductible as tare as a part of the inedible coverings, it was held that the cheese in question is dutiable upon the basis of the net weight of the cheese as returned by the United States weigher, not including the weight of the strings, less *2}í*percent for inedible coverings. The protest was sustained to this extent.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A1950. MARCUS A.WATKINS v. RALPH CHERRY, WARDEN OF THE

ROBERT A. DEYTON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al.

On April 5, 2016, this Court granted Marcus A. Watkins’s application for

discretionary appeal. The order notified Watkins that he had 10 days from the date

of the order to file his notice of appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (g). Sixteen days later,

on April 21, 2016, Watkins filed his notice of appeal.

The timely filing of a notice of appeal is an absolute requirement to confer

jurisdiction on this Court. See White v. White, 188 Ga. App. 556, 556 (373 SE2d

824) (1988). Because Watkinsfailed to file his notice of appeal within 10 days of our

order granting his application, his notice of appeal is untimely. Accordingly, this

appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See OCGA § 5-6-48 (b) (1); Barnes

v. Justis, 223 Ga. App. 671, 671-672 (478 SE2d 402) (1996). 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

07/01/2016

July 01, 2016
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 46 (Friday, March 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 10792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4227]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Mathematical and Physical Sciences Advisory Committee; Notice of 
Meeting

    In accordance with Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 
as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following 
meeting:
    Name: Mathematical and Physical Sciences Advisory Committee (66).
    Date/Time: April 6, 2007; 9 a.m.-12 p.m.
    Place: Teleconference, National Science Foundation, Room 1235, 4201 
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Dr. Morris L. Aizenman, Senior Science Associate, 
Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences, National Science 
Foundation, Room 1005, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230; 
(703) 292-8807.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning NSF science and education activities within the Directorate 
for Mathematical and Physical Sciences.
    Agenda: Budget and Planning, Report of the Committee of Visitors 
for the Division of Chemistry, Report of the Committee of Visitors for 
the Division of Mathematical Sciences.
    Summary Minutes: May be obtained from the contact person listed 
above.

    Dated: March 6, 2007.
Susanne E. Bolton,
Committee Management Officer.
 [FR Doc. E7-4227 Filed 3-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
**Exhibit23.1****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**     Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in Registration StatementsNo. 333-34746, No. 333-38020, No. 333-84958 andNo. 333-121331 on Forms S-8 of our reports datedMarch 1, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statementsand financial statement schedule of Grant Prideco, Inc. andmanagement’s report on the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report onForm 10-K of Grant Prideco, Inc. for the year endedDecember 31, 2005.     /s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPHouston, Texas
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4900 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 

Act to incentivize certain preparedness measures, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 31, 2024 

Ms. BUTLER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to incentivize certain preparedness 

measures, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Investing in Commu5 nity Resilience Act of 2024’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAMS. 

7 (a) AMENDMENT.—Section 406(b)(3)(A) of the Rob8 ert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 

9 Act (42 U.S.C. 5172(b)(3)(A)) is amended— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4900 IS

1 (1) in the matter preceding clause (i), by insert2 ing before the period ‘‘, including for subrecipients’’; 

3 (2) in clause (ii), by inserting ‘‘preparedness,’’ 

4 after ‘‘disaster relief,’’; 

5 (3) in clause (iv)— 

6 (A) by inserting ‘‘or programs designated 

7 by the Administrator of the Federal Emergency 

8 Management Agency to increase resilience for 

9 storms, tsunamis, wildfires, or equivalent disas10 ters’’ after ‘‘community rating system’’; and 

11 (B) by striking ‘‘and’’; 

12 (4) in clause (v), by striking the period and in13 serting ‘‘; and’’; and 

14 (5) by adding at the end the following: 

15 ‘‘(vi) support of viable community 

16 emergency response teams or equivalent 

17 non-governmental organizations that pro18 vide disaster assistance, including by— 

19 ‘‘(I) facilitating the establishment 

20 of mutual aid agreements supportive 

21 of the operation of such teams or or22 ganizations; or 

23 ‘‘(II) providing or facilitating 

24 regular training, outreach, and solicVerDate Sep 11 2014 21:06 Aug 29, 2024 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S4900.IS S4900

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4900 IS

1 iting participation in preparedness ex2 ercises.’’. 

3 (b) COMPREHENSIVE GUIDANCE.—Not later than 1 

4 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the President, 

5 acting through the Administrator, shall issue comprehen6 sive guidance to State and Tribal governments relating to 

7 the measures and investments described in section 

8 406(b)(3)(A) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief 

9 and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 

10 5172(b)(3)(A)), as amended in subsection (a). 

11 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

12 This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, 

13 shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the 

14 date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
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 American Surgical Holdings, Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, James A. Longaker, Chief Financial Officer, 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
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78 m or 78o (d));
      and2.
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of American
      Surgical Holdings, Inc.




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.






AMERICAN
SURGICAL HOLDINGS, INC.




By:
            /s/
      James A. LongakerJames
      A. LongakerChief
      Financial Officer
              (Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)




Date:
August 18, 2008
No. 61395.

protests 274085-K, etc. (New York).

#### Devotional Art Co. and Lansen Naeve Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of figures or figurines similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 15, C. A. D. 458), the items of merchandise marked with the letter “A” were held dutiable as follows: (a) As to the items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption prior to May 28, 1950, at 20 percent under paragraph 1547 (a); and (b) as to items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption subsequent to May 28, 1950, at 10 percent under said paragraph 1547 (a), as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 52373), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T. D. 52476).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-60,628] 

                    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on January 17, 2007, applicable to workers of QuadraFab Corporation, Plattsburgh, New York. The notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on February 7, 2007 (72 FR 5748).                 

At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged in the production of heated food display cases and fire alarm boxes. 

New information shows that in early 2006, QuadraFab Corporation purchased a portion of the assets of Integral Fabrication Corporation. Workers separated from employment at the subject firm had their wages reported under separate unemployment insurance (UI) tax accounts for both QuadraFab Corporation and Integral Fabrication Corporation. 

Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to properly reflect this matter. 

The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of QuadraFab Corporation who were adversely affected by a shift in production to Canada. 

The amended notice applicable to TA-W-60,628 is hereby issued as follows:

“All workers of QuadraFab Corporation, Integral Fabrication Corporation, Plattsburgh, New York, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after December 15, 2005, through January 19, 2009, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.”

Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of March 2007. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

 [FR Doc. E7-4579 Filed 3-13-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 17**  **- 6029** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
KENNETH ROSHAUN REID , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Rock Hill

. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. ( 0:04

- cr - 00353

- CMC

- 1 ; 0:09

- cv - 70126

- CMC )

Submitted : February 23, 2017 Decided: February 28, 2017

Before SHEDD and DIAZ , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Kenneth Roshaun Reid , Appellant Pro Se. Beth Drake, Acting U nited S tates Attorney , Jimmie Ewing , William Kenneth Witherspoon , Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South C arolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Kenneth Roshaun Reid seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion

.
We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court ’ s fin al judgment or order,
Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).
The district court’s order was entered on the docket on September 17, 2010 . The notice of appeal was filed on
January 6, 2017

. * Because Reid failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the envelope containing the undated notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 , 276 (1988).3 in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid
the de cisional process.

DISMISSED
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 January 16, 2019

Order 

Clerk

January 16, 2019

156579(67)

GENESEE COUNTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER

JEFFREY WRIGHT,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

and

CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF FENTON, DENNIS

BOW, KARYN MILLER, BONNIE MATHIS,

PAULA ZELENKO, MARILYN HOFFMAN,

LARRY GREEN, JAKE LAFURGEY, RAY

FOUST, DAVID GUIGEAR, ROBERT M.

PALMER, RICK CARUSO, WILLIAM W.

KOVL, MAXINE ORR, VILLAGE OF

GOODRICH, VILLAGE OF GAINES, VILLAGE

OF LENNON, CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF

MUNDY, TOWNSHIP OF ARGENTINE,

CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF FLINT, CHARTER

TOWNSHIP OF MT. MORRIS, TOWNSHIP OF

GAINES, and CITY OF FLUSHING,

Plaintiffs,

SC: 156579

v COA: 331023

Genesee CC: 11-097012-CK

GENESEE COUNTY,

Defendant-Appellant,

and

GENESEE COUNTY BOARD OF

COMMISSIONERS,

Defendant.

______________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant-appellant to file a response 

to the brief amicus curiae filed by Kickham Hanley, PLLC, is GRANTED. The response 

submitted on January 11, 2019, is accepted for filing.
**Exhibit 32.2**
**CERTIFICATION RELATING TO**
**PERIODIC REPORT**
**CONTAINING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS**
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Arch Western Resources, LLC (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned, Robert J. Messey, Vice President (Principal Accounting Officer) ofthe Company, certifies, 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) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany. /s/ ROBERT J. MESSEY  Robert J. Messey Vice President November 12, 2004
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or otherdocument authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signaturethat appears in typed form within the electronic version of this writtenstatement required by Section 906, has been provided to Arch Western Resources,LLC and will be retained by Arch Western Resources, LLC and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No.49696.

#### Protests 102357-K, etc., of Far Eastern Rubber Importers (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel sole crepe rubber similar to that the subject of *United States*v. *F. Lester Kittle, Inc.*(31 C. C. P. A. 233, C. A. D. 276)was held entitled to free entry as claimed.
#### Joseph J. Ploof, Respondent-Appellant, v Stone Construction Equipment, Inc., Defendant, and Baker Rental Sales & Fabrication, Inc., Appellant-Respondent.

[634 NYS2d 278]

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Plaintiff injured his hand and arm when he reached into a cement mixer while the mixer blades were rotating. He commenced this action against the manufacturer and seller of the cement mixer, asserting causes of action sounding in negligence, strict products liability and breach of warranty.

Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the breach of warranty cause of action upon the ground that it was time-barred *(see,*UCC 2-725) and denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the complaint to assert a claim for punitive damages *(cf., Home Ins. Co. v American Home Prods. Corp.,*75 NY2d 196, 203-204). Further, the court properly denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the negligence and strict products liability causes of action. Plaintiff failed to submit evidence warranting judgment in his favor as a matter of law.

The court erred, however, in refusing to grant the cross motion of defendant Baker Rental Sales & Fabrication, Inc. (Baker Rental) for summary judgment, dismissing the negligence cause of action in its entirety and the strict products liability cause of action insofar as it alleges a failure to warn. Baker Rental met its initial burden on its cross motion for summary *1009judgment and plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact *(see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp.,*68 NY2d 320, 324). He offered no evidence that defendants failed to test or inspect the mixer, that the mixer was negligently manufactured, or that defendants failed to warn of the dangers of inserting one’s hand in the mixer while the engine is running. Indeed, the owner’s manual did warn of that danger and plaintiff admitted that he had read it. Moreover, plaintiff admitted that he was aware of the danger of putting his hand in the mixer while the blades were rotating and that it was inappropriate for him to do so.

We further conclude that, to the extent the strict products liability cause of action alleges defective design, the court properly refused to grant summary judgment dismissing it. The court properly concluded that factual issues exist whether the absence of a kill switch or some other shut-off mechanism in proximity to the end of the mixer drum constituted a design defect and whether that alleged defect, in addition to plaintiff’s own conduct, was a substantial factor in causing plaintiff’s injury *(see, Voss v Black & Decker Mfg. Co.,*59 NY2d 102, 109-110).

Thus, we modify the order on appeal by granting in part the cross motion of Baker Rental for summary judgment, dismissing the negligence cause of action in its entirety and dismissing the strict products liability cause of action except insofar as it alleges that the mixer was defectively designed. (Appeals from Order of Supreme Court, Ontario County, Henry, Jr., J.— Dismiss Causes of Action.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Wesley, Balio and Boehm, JJ.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Senior Judges Hodges, Overton and 

 Retired Judge Stephens*

Argued at Chesapeake, Virginia 

BRIAN CHRISTOPHER DANIELS 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION** BY 

v. Record No. 1481-99-1 JUDGE WILLIAM H. HODGES 

 JUNE 13, 2000 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH 

Alan E. Rosenblatt, Judge 

 Theresa B. Berry (Berry, Ermlich, Lomax & 

Meixel, on brief), for appellant. 

 Robert H. Anderson, III, Assistant Attorney 

General (Mark L. Earley, Attorney General, on 

brief), for appellee. 

 Upon his pleas of guilty, the circuit court convicted Brian 

Christopher Daniels of robbery, abduction, and use of a firearm in 

the commission of robbery. The court sentenced Daniels to 

concurrent fifty-year sentences on the robbery and abduction 

convictions and a three-year sentence on the firearm conviction. 

On appeal, Daniels contends that the court erred in imposing these 

sentences. For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, and 

vacate and remand in part. 

 *

 Retired Judge J. Warren Stephens took part in the 

consideration of this case by designation pursuant to Code 

§ 17.1-400, recodifying Code § 17-116.01. 

** Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code 

§ 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication. 
 Daniels' maximum exposure on the abduction conviction was ten 

years. See Code §§ 18.2-10(e) and 18.2-47(A). Thus, the court 

erred in sentencing appellant to fifty years on this conviction. 

Accordingly, we vacate the fifty-year sentence on the abduction 

conviction and remand this matter to the trial court for 

resentencing. See Bell v. Commonwealth, 11 Va. App. 530, 534, 399 

S.E.2d 450, 453 (1991). 

 We find no error in the sentences given Daniels on the 

robbery and firearm convictions. "It is well settled that when 

the maximum punishment is prescribed by statute, 'and the 

sentence [imposed] does not exceed that maximum, the sentence 

will not be overturned as being an abuse of discretion.'" 

Valentine v. Commonwealth, 18 Va. App. 334, 339, 443 S.E.2d 445, 

448 (1994) (quoting Abdo v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 473, 479, 237 

S.E.2d 900, 903 (1977)). 

 The sentences imposed by the trial court on these 

convictions were within the ranges set by the legislature. See

Code §§ 18.2-53.1 and 18.2-58. It is within the trial court's 

purview to weigh any mitigating factors presented by Daniels. 

Accordingly, the court did not abuse its discretion in 

sentencing Daniels on the robbery and firearm convictions. 

Affirmed in part,

vacated and remanded

in part.

- 2 -