alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD HODGES, 

Petitioner, No. CIV-S-04-2087 MCE KJM P 

vs.

DAVID RUNNELS,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Respondent has requested an extension of time to file a response to petitioner’s

application for writ of habeas corpus. In this court’s November 16, 2005 order, respondent was

informed that no further extensions of time would be granted for respondent to file his response

absent a showing of extraordinary circumstances. Respondent has not made such a showing. 

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent’s January 13, 2006 request for an

extension of time is denied.

DATED: January 30, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

hodg2087.111

Case 2:04-cv-02087-MCE -KJM Document 13 Filed 01/31/06 Page 1 of 1
Before the Second Division,

December 11, 1946

No. 51463.

#### Protests 491016-G, etc., of Julius Kayser & Co. et al. (New York).

*231Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as the gloves which were the subject of *United States*v *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333). In accordance therewith the claim at 50 percent ad valorem under paragraph 915, plus any additional duty applicable under paragraph 924, was sustained.
EXHIBIT 32

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

In connection with the Annual Report of Case Financial, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we,
Michael Schaffer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Lawrence Schaffer,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively 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; and

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


                                        /s/ Michael Schaffer
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Michael Schaffer
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        January 11, 2007


                                        /s/ Lawrence Schaffer
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Lawrence Schaffer
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        January 11, 2007
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Thomas Wisniewski, :

Appellant :

:

v. : No. 912 C.D. 2021

:

James F. Frommer, Jr., D.O.; :

Andrew J. Dancha, D.O.; :

Correct Care Solutions, LLC; :

Deborah Cutshall; William Dreibelbis, :

R.N.; Paul A. Noel, M.D.; Eugene H. :

Ginchereau, M.D.; Kathy Montag; :

Jodie White; Andrea Norris, R.N.; :

Joseph J. Silva, R.N.; Christopher :

Oppman; Pennsylvania Department of :

Corrections :

PER CURIAM O R D E R

NOW, April 11, 2023, having considered Appellant’s application for 

reargument, the application is DENIED.
# C_2007175EN.01001301.xml

| 27.7.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 175/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/13

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 on the establishment of a common classification of territorial units for statistics (NUTS) by reason of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the European Union’

COM(2007) 95 final — 2007/0038 (COD)

(2007/C 175/04)

On 25 April 2007 the Council of the European Union decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

The Committee Bureau instructed the Section for Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion to prepare the Committee's work on the subject.

Given the urgent nature of the work, the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Burani as rapporteur-general at its 436th plenary session, held on 30 and 31 May 2007 (meeting of 30 May 2007), and adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1.   Introduction

| 1.1 | Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council established a common classification of territorial units for statistics (NUTS) for the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

1.1

Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council established a common classification of territorial units for statistics (NUTS) for the Member States.

| 1.2 | An initial amendment was made in 2005 following the accession of 10 new Member States. A further amendment has become necessary following the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, in order to insert tables concerning these new Member States into the annex to the regulation. |
| --- | --- |

1.2

An initial amendment was made in 2005 following the accession of 10 new Member States. A further amendment has become necessary following the accession of Bulgaria and Romania, in order to insert tables concerning these new Member States into the annex to the regulation.

2.   Comments and conclusions

| 2.1 | The EESC takes note of the Commission's proposal. Given that the need for the proposal has arisen following the accession of new Member States, and that it is of a purely technical nature, the Committee gives its full agreement. |
| --- | --- |

2.1

The EESC takes note of the Commission's proposal. Given that the need for the proposal has arisen following the accession of new Member States, and that it is of a purely technical nature, the Committee gives its full agreement.

Brussels, 30 May 2007.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

---
**Exhibit 10.6.3**

**AMENDMENT [_________] TO EXHIBIT B OF RESELLER ADDENDUM (EXHIBIT C OF SUBCONTRACT AGREEMENT)**

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, a Delaware corporation (“HP”) and 724 Solutions Corp., a Delaware corporation and its Affiliates  (“Subcontractor”), entered into a Subcontract Agreement effective March 17, 2002 (“Agreement”).  Exhibit C of the Agreement is the Reseller Addendum (“Addendum”) and sets forth the terms and conditions governing the resale of the Subcontractor Software, including the fees payable by HP to Subcontractor in Exhibit B to the Addendum.

The parties amended that Agreement in December 2002 by modifying Exhibit B to the Addendum by inserting a new Section 10 Exhibit B.   The parties now wish to further modify the Agreement by adding a second paragraph to Section 10 in Exhibit B to the Agreement, as follows:

“**10.           Additional Licenses**

[First paragraph of Section 10, amended in December 2002, remains unchanged.] 

“In addition to the licenses and fees set forth in the Agreement and its Amendment One, HP agrees to purchase, on a non-refundable basis for the purpose of resale, an additional [______] Subscriber licenses of the NGG Application Software from Subcontractor for the price of $[______] per Subscriber, and an additional [______] Subscriber licenses of the NGG Application Software from Subcontractor for the price of $[______] per Subscriber.  Such fees for the Subscriber licenses described in this paragraph shall be payable as follows:  $[______] on [______].  Annual maintenance and support for these [______] Subscribers commences on the earlier of deployment of such licenses or [______] at the rate of [______]% of the NGG Application Software license fees per month, payable in arrears.  Support provided prior to the commencement of payment will be Level 3 Technical Support as defined herein.”  

All other terms and conditions of the Agreement and the Addendum not specifically modified in this Amendment Two shall remain unchanged, and in full force and effect.

| AGREED TO: |                                  | AGREED TO: |
|------------|---------------------------------------|------------|
|       | 724 SOLUTIONS (US) INC.               |       | HP: | HEWLETT-PACKARD   COMPANY |
|       |                                  |       |   |   |
|       |                                  |       |   |   |
|       |                                       |       |   |  |
|       | Authorized Representative Signature   |       |   | Authorized Representative Signature |
|       |                                  |       |   |   |
| Name:      |                                  |       | Name: |   |
|       |                                  |       |   |   |
| Title:     |                                  |       | Title: | Contract Negotiator |
|       |                                  |       |   |   |
|       |                                  |       |   |   |
| Address:   | 1221 State Street, Suite 200          |       | Address: | 9737 Washingtonian Blvd., Suite 100 |
|       | Santa Barbara, California  93101 |       |   | Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878 |
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1673-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Missouri (FEMA-1673-DR), dated December 29, 2006, and related determinations. 

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         March 2, 2007.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Missouri is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of December 29, 2006: 

Callaway, Camden, Marion, and Miller Counties for Public Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison, 

Under Secretary for Federal Emergency Management and Director of FEMA.

[FR Doc. E7-4436 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on
Form S-8 POS (No. 333-37914 filed on July 5, 2000) of Genius Products, Inc. and
Subsidiaries of our report dated March 20, 2001, on our audit of the financial
statements of Genius Products, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000,
and for each of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2000.


                                         /S/ CACCIAMATTA ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION

                                         CACCIAMATTA ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION

Irvine, California
April 30, 2001
**Exhibit 32.2**

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

The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to, and asrequired by, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Nathaniel EnergyCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31,2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information containedin such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

Dated:March 29, 2006

|        | By:    | /s/ Timothy A. Peach                      |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Timothy A. Peach  Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
No. 52993.

#### Goodwin Johnson, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 80821-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the issue herein is the same in all material respects as that presented in *Mamary Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 135, C. D. 1142). In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries involved. The protests were sustained to this extent.
February 17, 1944

No. 49218.

Suit 4426.

#### United *States*v. *Graham & Zenger, Inc.,*

Reap. Dec. 5751 affirmed. C. A. D. 262.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 INFORMATIONAL ADDENDUM TO REPORT ON FORM 10-K/A PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 NOT FILED PURSUANT TO THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 Solely for the purpose of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and solely to the extent this certification may be applicable to this Report on Form 10-K/A, the
undersigned hereby certify that this report on Form 10-K/A of Grant Prideco, Inc. fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that information contained herein this report on Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Grant Prideco, Inc. December 15, 2004
    
    /s/ Michael McShaneName: Michael McShaneTitle: Chief Executive Officer/s/ Matthew D. FitzgeraldName: Matthew D. FitzgeraldTitle: Chief Financial Officer
No. 57321.

protest 198401-K (New York).

#### Pitt & Scott Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The record disclosed that the merchandise was imported on November 30, 1950, and entered for consumption on December 1, 1950. A reduction in duty from 60 to 50 percent was made as to articles covered by paragraph 228 (a) by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T. D. 52739), supplemented by T. D. 52820, effective as to articles entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after October 1, 1951. Inasmuch as the official papers indicated that the merchandise in question was imported prior to the effective date of the trade agreement under which the plaintiff apparently claims, the protest was overruled.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
               (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE AND PER SHARE AMOUNTS)

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                                FISCAL YEAR
                                                                   ENDED
                                                               SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                                   2001
                                                               -------------
<S>                                                            <C>
COMPUTATION OF BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE:
  Weighted average shares outstanding.......................      5,950,000
                                                                ===========
  Net (loss)................................................    $(2,270,813)
                                                                ===========
  Basic (loss) per share....................................    $     (0.38)
                                                                ===========
COMPUTATION OF DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE:
  Weighted average shares outstanding.......................      5,950,000
  Dilutive impact of stock options, as determined by the
     application of the treasury stock method...............             --
                                                                -----------
  Weighted average shares and common stock equivalents......      5,950,000
                                                                ===========
  Net (loss)................................................    $(2,270,813)
                                                                ===========
  Diluted (loss) per share..................................    $     (0.38)
                                                                ===========
</Table>
UPS Tracking Number:

September 16, 2009 Mr. Ross Bell Air Pollution Control Officer Shasta County Air Quality Management District 1855 Placer Street Redding, CA 96001 

### Director, Air Division (Attn: AIR-5) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105-3901 Re: 2009 Operating Permit Compliance Re-Test Results for Furnace Line #641 

### Dear Mr. Ross Bell and Director, Air Division, Please find attached one copy of the compliance tests results for Knauf Insulation furnace #641. The Avogadro Group performed the tests on August 6, 2009. Our allowable emission limits and tested emission rates in pounds per hour are as follows:

Parameter Emission Rate (lb / hr)

Furnace Stack Furnace Allowable Total Particulate 1 0.137 0.67 Total Particulate 2 0.138 Method 5/202 2 Method 5/0TM28 The process data collected during the individual tests with regard to the production rate and opacity readings from the furnace stack is on file at the Shasta Lake facility.

Knauf Insulation GmbH, One Knauf Drive, Shelbyville, IN 46176 Telephone (317) 398-4434, Fax (317) 398-3675, www.KnaufInsulation.comIf there are any questions, please contact me at your convenience at 1-800-825-4434 ext. 8408

or 

### steve.aldridcle@us.knaufinsulation.com

. Respectfully submitted,

I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.

Stephen R. Aldri.e Knauf Insulation, Manager Environmental Health and Safety Cc: lain James, Director Plant Operations, Shasta Lake, California

Enclosures: 2009 Particulate Matter Emissions Source Test Report — Hard Copy EPA 2009 Particulate Matter Emissions Source Test Report — CD AQMD Confidential Business Information Packet — EPA and AQMD

Knauf Insulation GmbH, One Knauf Drive, Shelbyville, IN 46176 Telephone (317) 398-4434, Fax (317) 398-3675, www.KnaufInsulation.com
Figure 8 - 1. Annual 2002 - 2004 CMAQ derived annual average fraction of ambient concentrations (above) and deposition (below) of individual NOy species delineated by the Adirondack and Shenandoah case study areas and the remainder of the Eastern U.S. domain (Figure update 10/4/10).
#### In the Matter of Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Appellant, v City of Dunkirk Assessor et al., Respondents.

(Appeal No. 1.)

[635 NYS2d 380]

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner challenges the tax assessments at its steam generation station in the City of Dunkirk for the years 1991,1992 and 1993. Because petitioner’s appraisers admitted to employing a series of improper deductions that significantly undervalued the station, Supreme Court properly struck petitioner’s appraisal reports and determined that petitioner failed to make out a prima facie case in challenging the assessments *(see, Matter of Orange & Rockland Utils, v Williams,*187 AD2d 595, 596-597; *Matter of State of New York v Town of Thurman,*183 AD2d 264, 269-270).

Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the court properly admitted documents that contradicted information contained in petitioner’s appraisal reports as admissions against interest by the corporation *(see,*57 NY Jur 2d, Evidence and Witnesses, § 318, at 592).

Because petitioner failed to lay a proper foundation for the admission of the asbestos study, the court properly refused to admit it as a business record *(see,*CPLR 4518 [a]; *see also, Standard Textile Co. v National Equip. Rental,*80 AD2d 911).

Finally, petitioner failed to present any proof of disparate treatment or purposeful discrimination in support of its equal protection claim and thus failed to overcome the presumption of validity of the assessment *(see, Matter of Carriage House Motor Inn v City of Watertown,*136 AD2d 895, *affd*72 NY2d 990). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Gerace, J.—Tax Certiorari.) Present—Denman, P. J., Fallon, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.
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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Brian Hackett,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-2088 FCD PAN P

vs. Order

D. Kimbrell, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoJune 7, 2005, plaintiff requested a second extension of time

to file an amended complaint. Good cause appearing, plaintiff’s

request is granted and time is extended until 30 days from the

date this order is signed.

So ordered.

Dated: June 16, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02088-FCD-EFB Document 25 Filed 06/17/05 Page 1 of 1