alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 64944.

#### Waldburger & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 58/23975, etc. (New York).

*389Opinion by

Kao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of waterproof cotton similar in all material respects to that the subject of *United States*v. *D.*H. *Grant & Co., Inc.*(47 C.C.P.A. 20, C.A.D. 723), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of GTx, Inc.;
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this 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
report;
 4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date: May 4, 2010/s/ Mitchell S. Steiner

Mitchell S. Steiner, M.D., F.A.C.S.
Chief Executive Officer and
Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors
No. 47934.

#### Protest 76300-K of T. D. Downing Co. (Boston).

*378Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Oy Wo Tong Co.*v. *United States*(5 Cust. Ct. 70, C. D. 372) the claim for free entry under paragraph 1669 was sustained.
Before the Third Division,

January 5, 1942

No. 46767.

#### Protests 63016-K, etc., of Sterling Linens, Inc., et al. (New York).

*430Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following *Bullocks*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 110, C. D. 441) the merchandise in question was held not subject to countervailing duty as claimed.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 20, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 13105]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5019]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP96-320-072]


Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP; Notice of Negotiated Rate Filing

March 14, 2007.
    Take notice that on March 9, 2007, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP 
(Gulf South) filed with the Commission an amendment to a negotiated 
rate letter agreement between Gulf South and Atmos to correct the 
agreement's expiration date.
    Gulf South states that copies of the filing has served copies of 
this filing upon all parties on the official service list.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of 
Sec.  154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone 
filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on 
the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before 
the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or 
protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4c0a091e0f0322202522291f393c3c233e380c2a293e2f622b233a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aee8ebfcede1c0c2c7c0cbfddbdedec1dcdaeec8cbdccd80c9c1d8">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E7-5019 Filed 3-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 05-610.2 

________________________________________________________________________ 

SPACE COOPERATION 

Global Precipitation 

Measurement Program 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and JAPAN 

Effected by Exchange of Notes at 

Washington June 10, 2005 

with 

Memorandum of Understanding 
 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.” 
JAPAN 

Space Cooperation: Global Precipitation 

 Measurement Program 

 Agreement effected by exchange of notes at 

 Washington June 10, 2005; 

 Entered into force June 10, 2005. 

 With memorandum of understanding.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION1350**

 

In connection with the Worldspan, L.P. (the “Company”) Quarterly Reporton Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Rakesh Gangwal,Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Michael S.Wood, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that, to the best of our knowledge:

 

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

 

(2).                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Date:  | May 19, 2004 |   |   | By:    | /s/ Rakesh Gangwal      |   |
|--------|--------------|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   |         |   |   |   | Rakesh Gangwal          |   |
|   |         |   |   |   | Chief Executive Officer |   |
|   |         |   |   |   |                    |   |
| Date:  | May 19, 2004 |   |   | By:    | /s/ Michael S. Wood     |   |
|   |         |   |   |   | Michael S. Wood         |   |
|   |         |   |   |   | Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
**B F**  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 2
- 0 0 42 STATE OF MONTANA ,

Plaintiff and Appellee , v. JOHNATHAN ALBERT BERTSCH ,

Defendant and Appellant.**ORDER** Upon consideration Appellee ’s motion for a 3 0
- day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including May 16 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve its response brief

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 8 2024

04/08/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0042
#### United States *v.*Texas Importing Co.

No. 6296.

Entry No. 171-H.

Invoice dated Mexico, D. F., April 6, 1946.

Certified April 6, 1945.

Entered at Houston, Tex., April 19, 1945.

(Decided July 24, 1946)

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Joseph E. Weil,*special attorney), for the plaintiff.

No appearance for the defendant.

Cline, Judge:

This is an appeal for reappraisement filed by the collector of customs at the port of Galveston. The merchandise under appraisement consists of children’s pigskin house slippers imported from Mexico on April 13, 1945. They were invoiced at 2.00 Mexican currency per pair and entered at. the same amount, plus containers, packing, and stamps. The invoice indicates that the purchase price was the same as the home consumption value.

■ At the trial plaintiff called Mrs. Helen Yertna Lasiter, wife of the importer. She testified that her firm had imported, the merchandise on April 13, 1945, at a price of 2 pesos per pair, plus containers, packing, and sales tax. Another shipment was received on April 20, 1945, from the same exporter at a price of 2.10 pesos per pair, plus containers, packing, and sales tax. A letter from the exporter, dated April 6, 1945, produced by Mrs. Lasiter, stated:

> As you will notice, this shipment is at the old price, although pigskin has gone up since * * * had some on hand. In the future will have to invoice at 2.10 and 1.90.

It further appeared that the second shipment was purchased prior to April 13, 1945, at 2.10 Mexican, but the first shipment had been entered at 2.00. No amendment to the entry was made because the merchandise had already been appraised.

The merchandise invoiced as children’s pigskin house slippers is appraised at 2.10 Mexican pesos per pair, plus containers, packing, and 0.88 per centum sales tax. Judgment will be rendered accordingly
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7235

TIMOTHY TODD HAYES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

W. T. JOHNSON; GRADY MULLINS; M. C. AMMONS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.

(CA-02-2218)

Submitted: January 15, 2004 Decided: January 27, 2004

Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy Todd Hayes, Appellant Pro Se. Edgar Lloyd Willcox, III,

WILLCOX, BUYCK & WILLIAMS, P.A., Florence, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Todd Hayes appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. The district

court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended

that relief be denied and advised Hayes that failure to file timely

objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of

a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this

warning, Hayes failed to object to the magistrate judge’s

recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate

judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of

the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been

warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. See

Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also

Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Hayes has waived appellate

review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

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 the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
No. 56497.

protests 167814-K (B) and 167814-K (C) (New York).

#### Hirschberg Schutz *&*Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the Federal Reserve bank certified dual rates of exchange for the currency involved in the liquidation of the entries for the dates of exportation of the merchandise covered by the entries and that the circumstances relating to the liquidation of the said entries are similar in all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. In view of this stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the currency of the invoices should have been converted in the manner directed by the judgment of this court in said Abstract 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
Exhibit 32.4

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of
the Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to
the best of his knowledge:



| | (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 results of operations of the Currency Series.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                                            
|Robert J. Enck President
and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of the Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund
|                                                                                                                                                              
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                                                                               
|Brent Bales Chief Financial
Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of the Currency Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund                 

Date:
May 12, 2011
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Paul Pender, Also Known as Peter Boykin, Appellant.

[633 NYS2d 830]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.), rendered October 8, 1992, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and robbery in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court’s ruling permitting the prosecutor to cross-examine the defendant regarding his 1989 convictions for grand larceny in the fourth degree and attempted robbery in the second degree was not an improvident exercise of discretion. The mere fact that a defendant’s prior crimes are similar or even identical to a crime presently charged does not automatically preclude their use for impeachment purposes on cross-examination *(see, People v Ardila,*202 AD2d 514, *affd*85 NY2d 846; *People v Bowman,*211 AD2d 590; *People v Coates,*166 AD2d 389; *People v Mingues,*165 AD2d 774; *People v Mc-Aleavey,*159 AD2d 646; *People v Torres,*110 AD2d 794). Moreover, the prior offenses were "indicative of his willingness to place his * * * interests above those of society and his possible willingness to do so again on the witness stand” and therefore were relevant to the issue of the defendant’s credibility *(People v Ardila, supra,*at 514; *see also, People v Sandoval,*34 NY2d 371, 377; *People v Bowman, supra,*at 591; *People v Lynch,*209 AD2d 827).

*574The prosecutor’s comments during summation do not warrant reversal. The trial court’s prompt curative instructions mitigated any prejudice resulting to the defendant *(see, People v Berg,*59 NY2d 294; *People v Arce,*42 NY2d 179).

The defendant’s sentence was not excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental *pro se*brief, are unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Johnson,*161 AD2d 732; *People v Brown,*81 NY2d 798). Balletta, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8210 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8210

To amend the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act to eliminate a 
requirement that certain individuals be related by blood or marriage to 
be eligible for farm loans as a qualified beginning farmer or rancher, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 1, 2024

   Ms. Lee of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on Agriculture,

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act to eliminate a 
requirement that certain individuals be related by blood or marriage to 
be eligible for farm loans as a qualified beginning farmer or rancher, 
                        and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Future Farmers and Ranchers of 
Tomorrow Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY FOR FARM LOANS AS A QUALIFIED BEGINNING FARMER OR 
              RANCHER.

    Section 343(a)(11) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
Act (7 U.S.C. 1991(a)(11)) is amended by striking subparagraph (C) and 
redesignating subparagraphs (D) through (G) as subparagraphs (C) 
through (F), respectively.
                                 <all>
```
Memorandum Opinion filed October 20, 2015, Withdrawn; Appeal 

Reinstated; Motion Denied; and Order Filed October 27, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-00437-CV

____________

RICHARD A. DUNSMORE, Appellant

V.

MADELINE ORTIZ, ET AL, Appellee

On Appeal from the 412th District Court

Brazoria County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 76312-I

ORDER

This court notified the parties on September 29, 2015, of its intent to dismiss 

the appeal for appellant’s failure to comply with Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code 

Ann. § 14.004, unless any party showed meritorious grounds for continuing the 

appeal by October 9, 2015. Having received no response to that notice, the court 

issued an opinion dismissing this appeal on October 20, 2015. 
Just after the opinion was issued, the court received documents from the 

appellant in an envelope postmarked October 7, 2015. The documents substantially 

comply with the requirements of section 14.004. 

Accordingly, the opinion filed October 20, 2015, is WITHDRAWN, and 

our judgment of that date is VACATED. The appeal is ordered REINSTATED.

Appellant’s motion to be appointed an attorney, filed August 11, 2015, was 

denied as moot on October 15, 2015. We WITHDRAW our ruling of October 15, 

2015, and now DENY that motion.

PER CURIAM
Before the Second Division,

September 25, 1944

No. 49726.

#### Petition 6399-R of Woodward & Lothrop (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

From examination of the record and the testimony, the court was satisfied that the entry was made without any intention to defraud the revenue or to conceal or misrepresent the facts. The petition was therefore granted.
#### The People of the State of New York *ex rel.*J. W. Sickels *v.*Court of General Sessions.

Order affirmed. Mem. by Davis, P. J.
(Reap. Dec. 10150)

#### Langfelder, Homma & Carroll, Inc., by Frank P. Dow Co., Inc., of L.A. *v.*United States

Entry No. 60938.

(Decided January 24, 1962)

*Siegel, Handell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*William H. Orricft, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The merchandise the subject of the above-enumerated appeal for reappraisement consists of badminton sets, imported from Japan and entered at the port of Los Angeles on May 19,1960.

The merchandise was appraised on the basis of export value, as defined in section 402a (d), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, at the invoice unit prices, plus items of buying commission and so-called “FOB” charges, as stated on the invoice, evidently on the basis that the shipper was the seller of the merchandise.

*526Counsel for the parties have submitted the appeal for decision upon stipulation, on the basis of which I find that the merchandise was purchased from the firm of Maruwa Shoji, Inc., Tokyo, Japan, and that the said Maruwa Shoji, Inc., was the actual seller of the merchandise contained in cases marked T-50001/72 and shipped by the Sanwa Trading Co.

Upon the basis of further facts stipulated by the parties, I find export value, as defined in section 402a(d), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise and that such value, in each instance, is the unit value as set forth on the invoice.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Order entered April 1, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 14 - 01319 - CV DANA AND CHRISTOPHER SHEARIN, Appellant s V. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A., Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 004 - 01581 - 2014 

### O RDER Before the Court is court reporter Claudia Webb’s March 30, 2015 fourth request for an extension of time to file the record, which was originally due February 3, 2015. We GRANT the request and ORDER the record be filed no later than April 7, 2015

. We caution Ms. Webb that if the record is not filed by April 7th, we may order she not sit as a court reporter until the record is filed.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
No. 42948.

#### Protests 237-K, etc., of H. Muehlstein & Co., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Weber*v. *United States*(3 Cust. Ct. 8, C. D. 190) the hard-rubber dust in question was held dutiable at 25 percent under paragraph 1537 as claimed.