alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 61890.

#### Trans Atlantic Company *v.*United States,

protest 306013-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of butt hinges, imported with wood screws of steel, the hinges measuring 3 inches by 3 inches or 3)4 inches by 3)4 inches, being packed 2 hinges and 12 screws to a box (12 screws for each pair of hinges), and the hinges, size 4 inches by 4 inches, being packed 2 hinges and 16 screws to a box (16 screws for each pair of hinges), of the same kind in all material respects as the merchandise the subject of *Trans Atlantic Company*v. *United States*(35 Oust. Ct. 1, C. D. 1712). Upon the agreed statement of facts and following the cited authority, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained, the value of the screws being held as follows, as stipulated by counsel:

> Value of screws

> Item per 1,000

> 3x3 $1.21

> 3)4 x 3)4 $1.48

> 4x4 - $1.64

which values were included in the value of the screws and hinges, as invoiced and appraised.
Before the First Division,

November 4, 1948

No. 52651.

protests 72851-K, etc. (New York).

#### China Importing Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of mah jong sets, artificial ivory figures, "and other articles composed of synthetic resin similar in all material respects to the articles which were the subject of Abstracts 51306 and 51959. The claim at 20 percent under paragraph 1558 was therefore sustained.
CERTIFICATION
                           OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                     AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF
                         THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Bernie McGinn, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of LABONTE, INC.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
     statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
     make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
     statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
     this quarterly report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
     material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
     flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
     quarterly report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
     registrant and have:

     (a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
          material information relating to the a registrant is made known to me
          by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
          which this quarterly report is being prepared;

     (b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure control and
          procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     (c)  presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about effectiveness
          of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of
          the Evaluation Date;

5.   I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
     auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or
     persons performing the equivalent functions):

     (a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weakness in
          internal controls; and

     (b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6.   I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
     changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly
     affect internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent
     evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
     deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Dated: July 7, 2004

/s/ Bernie McGinn
---------------------
    Bernie McGinn
    Chief Executive Officer,
    Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Form 10-KSB of MEDIANET GROUP TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Martin Berns, Chief Executive 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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/ Martin Berns
----------------
Martin Berns
Chief Executive Officer

April 11, 2008
No. 54092.

#### Waldburger & Huber et al. *v.*United States,

protests 494636-G, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The protests were dismissed.
TP 7245E 1 of 1

AD Number: CF-2015-04

Issue Date: 17 March 2015

AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE The following airworthiness directive (AD) may be applicable to an aircraft which our records indicate is registered in your name. ADs are issued pursuant to Canadian Aviation 

Regulation (CAR) 521 Division X. Pursuant to CAR 605.84 and the further details of CAR Standard 625, Appendix H, the continuing airworthiness of a Canadian registered aircraft is contingent upon compliance with all applicable ADs. Failure to comply with the requirements of an AD may invalidate the flight authorization of the aircraft. Alternative means of compliance shall be applied for in accordance with CAR 605.84 and the above-referenced Standard.

This AD has been issued by the Continuing Airworthiness Division (AARDG), National Aircraft Certification Branch, Transport Canada, Ottawa, telephone 613 952-4357.

Number: CF-2015-04 Effective Date: 31 March 2015

ATA: 34 Type Certificate: A-234

Subject: Navigation – Pitot-Static Probe Heater Failure

Applicability: Bombardier Inc. model BD-100-1A10 aeroplanes, serial numbers 20003 to 20500.

Compliance: Within 24 months from the effective date of this AD, unless already accomplished.

Background: There have been several reports where the pitot-static probe heater came on and 

remained on regardless of the heater control selected position. Investigation determined 

that the root cause is a short circuit between the heater element and the metal sheath. If 

not corrected, this condition may degrade the heating, resulting in erroneous Airspeed 

Indication when flying in icing condition.

This AD mandates the replacement of the pitot-static probes with a redesigned probe 

which will prevent this failure mode.

Corrective Actions:

Remove and replace the left and right pitot-static probes with the new design pitot-static 

probes, part numbers (P/N) 0856WC3 and 0856WC4 respectively. Bombardier 

Aerospace Service Bulletin 100-34-38, Basic Issue, dated 9 January 2014, or later 

revisions approved by the Chief, Continuing Airworthiness, Transport Canada, provides 

approved instructions for replacing the pitot-static probes.

As of the effective date of this AD, it is prohibited for anyone to install pitot-static probes 

with P/Ns 0856WC1 or 0856WC2.

Authorization: For the Minister of Transport, 

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY

Derek Ferguson

Chief, Continuing Airworthiness

Contact: Gordanko Jeremic, Continuing Airworthiness, Ottawa, telephone 613-952-4357, facsimile 

613-996-9178 or e-mail AD-CN@tc.gc.ca or any Transport Canada Centre.

Pursuant to CAR 202.51 the registered owner of a Canadian aircraft shall, within seven days, notify the Minister 

in writing of any change of his or her name or address. 

For all changes to your mailing address, contact your TC Regional Aircraft Registration Office at 1-800-305-2059,

option 1 for English, 2 for Aircraft Registration and then select the appropriate region.

24-0022 (01-2005)
6816

#### THACKSTON v. GOODWIN, SUPERVISOR.

Railroad Aid Bonds. — County Commissioners may issue bonds for refunding or paying railroad aid bonds without special act of the General Assembly and without submitting the question to an election, and whether the railroad stock issued for the bonds in the first instance is now null and void or not.

*397Petition by W. J. Thackston against J. P. Goodwin, supervisor of Greenville County, alleging that the supervisor has issued, under the aot of the Assembly, thirty-five thousand dollars’ worth of bonds, know as the Atlanta and Richmond Air Line Railway bonds, .and five thousand five hundred dollars’ worth of bonds known as the Greenville and Lauren's Railway .bonds, for purpose of refunding the said respective amounts of bonds maturing in 1907; that the said supervisor is now about to sell the same, and they are illegal and invalid because: (1) There is no record to show that an election was held at the timle of the issuance of the original bonds; and (2) the stock issued to said county by the railroad corporation in lien of the bonds has, by the course of events, been rendered null and void.

The supervisor admits that there is no record -to show that an election was held at the time of the issuance of the original 'bonds, but alleges that an election was duly held, and resulted in favor of the issuance of the bonds, .and after stating the legislation upon which' the original issue was based, says:

“Defendant further alleges, upon information and belief, that the board of county commissioners, for said county are authorized and empowered, under Sections 2015, 2016 and 2020', Volume I, Code of Laws of South Carolina, 1902, to issue and sell negotiable coupon bonds from time to' time and in such am|ountsi as 'shall be proper for the purpose of refunding or paying the whole or any part of the county’s bonded indebtedness existing at the time of the adoption of the present Constitution, whether the same has matured or not, without a special act of the General Assembly, and without submitting the question as to -the creation of such-bonded indebtedness to the qualified electors of s'aid county; that the new bonds now proposed to 'be issued' and sold by the -county board of commissioners for Greenville County are for the purpose of refunding or paying a part of the bonded indebtedness of said county, which existed at the *398time of the adoption of the present ¡Constitution and' which matured at the time hereinbefore stated.”

*Messrs. Cothran, Dean & Cothran,*for petitioner.

*Mr. Oscar Hodges,*contra.

March 20, 1908.

Per Curiam.

After careful consideration of the questions presented by the pleadings herein, this Court is. satisfied that no sufficient grounds exist for granting the injunction and that the petition should be dismissed for the reasons set forth in the return.

It is, therefore, the judgment of this Court, that the petition be dismissed.
EXHIBIT 32.1  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

Amendment No. 1 to

the Annual Report of IceWEB, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Hal Compton, Sr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as adopted pursuant to SS. 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.  January28, 2014/s/ Hal Compton, Sr.Hal Compton, Sr., Chief Executive Officer andprincipal executive officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
MCES, Metropolitan WWTP (MCES' main WWTP) Mercury Reductions Through 

Minneapolis - St. Paul, Minnesota Metropolitan Area

METRO INFLUENT Hg LOADING (g/day) Summary statistics through 

Statistic 2003 2004 2005 2006

N 59 94 142 133

Average 261 213 220 187

Median 241 191 179 156

25th Percentile 204 164 141 128

75th Percentile 288 234 230 207

Minimum 116 94 89 59

Maximum 625 615 1216 910

Change from previous year (%) NA -21 -6 -13

Cumulative change since 2003 (%) 0 -21 -26 -35

Peter Berglund, 651-602-4708

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Median daily influent Hg load, Metro 

(g/day)

data through 10/20/2010
P) Mercury Reductions Through 2010

10/20/2010

2007 2008 2009 2010

120 126 138 77

138 142 142 139

121 124 130 118

98 98 104 94

156 161 158 147

50 48 43 58

429 450 455 724

-23 2 4 -9

-50 -49 -46 -51

2009 2010 2011

75th percentile

median

25th percentile

data through 10/20/2010
Exhibit 23.1 

 

**Independent Auditors’ Consent**

 

The Board of Directors 

Open TV Corp. 

 

We consent to the incorporation byreference in the registration statements (No. 333-74026, No. 333-52180, No. 333-42892 and No. 333-37196) on Form S-8 of OpenTV Corp. and subsidiaries of our report dated April 8, 2003, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of OpenTVCorp. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders’ equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2002, and the related financial statement schedule, which report appearsin the December 31, 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K of OpenTV Corp. and subsidiaries. 

 

Our report dated April 8, 2003 refers to the Company’s adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets,” as of January 1, 2002 and the audit of thereclassification that was applied to revise the 2001 consolidated financial statements for the adoption of Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 01-09, “Accounting for Consideration Given by a Vendor to a Customer or Reseller of theVendor’s Products,” as more fully described in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements. However, we were not engaged to audit, review or apply any procedures to the 2001 or 2000 consolidated financial statements other than withrespect to such reclassification. 

 

/s/    KPMG LLP 

 

MountainView, California 

April 8, 2003
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-4636

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

HARVEY L. LEWIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.

(CR-99-329)

Submitted: March 8, 2001 Decided: March 15, 2001

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edwin F. Brooks, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Stephen W.

Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Harvey L. Lewis appeals his fifteen month sentence imposed

pursuant to his conviction upon a guilty plea to two counts of

being an unlawful drug user in possession of a weapon in violation

of 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g)(3) (West 2000). One count was vacated by

the district court pursuant to United States v. Dunford, 148 F.3d

385 (4th Cir. 1998). Lewis’ attorney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising one

sentencing issue on appeal but stating that, in his view, there are

no meritorious issues for appeal. Lewis was informed of his right

to file a pro se supplemental brief but has failed to do so.

At sentencing, Lewis requested a downward departure on the

grounds that his possession of the weapon was accidental, the

weapon was unloaded and he had no ammunition, and he presented evidence that he had broken his addiction to drugs. The court considered these grounds but elected not to depart. Where the sentencing

court was aware of its authority to depart and simply declined to

do so, we lack authority to review its decision. See United States

v. Bayerle, 898 F.2d 28, 31 (4th Cir. 1990).

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record

in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We

therefore dismiss this appeal. We deny counsel’s motion to withdraw at this time. This court requires that counsel inform his

client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of
3

the United States for further review. If the client requests that

a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition

would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave

to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that

a copy thereof was served on the client.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid in the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Before the Third Division,

May 12, 1960

No. 64183.

protests 214616-K, etc. (Detroit).

#### John V. Carr & Son, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of prepared or preserved pork similar in all material respects to that the subject of *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct 36, C.D. 2100), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<PAGE>
  

    
                                                  EXHIBIT 21 


                     Subsidiaries of the Company 


    As of March 15, 1996, the Company owned or controlled the following 
percentages of the capital stock of the corporations listed below:  


                                     State or Country of
    Name of Corporation                     Incorporation          % Owned


Crystal Spectialties, Inc.               California             100

Kollmorgen Asia Investment Company            Delaware                    100

Kollmorgen Foreign Sales Corporation     U.S. Virgin Islands         100

Kollmorgen Instruments Corporation            Delaware                    100

Kollmorgen Overseas Development Corporation   Delaware                    100

Proto-Power Corporation                  Delaware               100

Proto-Technology Corporation             Delaware               100

Questec Enterprises, Inc.                Delaware               100

31 Sea Cliff Avenue Corporation          New York               100

Kollmorgen Instruments GmbH              West Germany           100

Kollmorgen A.G.                      Switzerland            100

Kollmorgen Asia Investment Company B.V.       Netherlands            100

Kollmorgen India Investment Company B.V. Netherlands            100

Kollmorgen India Holding Company B.V.         Netherlands            100

Kollmorgen India Investment Company      Mauritius                   100

Kollmorgen Tandon (India)                India                   51

Kollmorgen (U.K.) Limited                Great Britain               100

Tianjin Kollmorgen Industrial            Peoples' Republic 
    Drives Corporation                      of China             50

PMI Motion Technologies GmbH             West Germany           100

Artus Group                          France                 100
    Kollmorgen Artus
    Societe Anonyme Cryla
No. 63125.

#### International Expediters, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 58/16911 (New York).

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with rule 5 (b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
**Exhibit 31.2****Certification**     I, Robert J. Messey, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Arch Western Resources, LLC;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) [Reserved.]  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.                                                           /s/ Robert J. Messey   Robert J. Messey   Vice President   Date: August 11, 2006