alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 8593)

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

Entry No. 874448.

*609(Decided June 15, 1956)

*Siegel Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

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

Wilson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the Appeal to Reappraisement enumerated above consists of electric bulbs imported from Japan.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the market value or the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for export to the United States including the costs of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise ready for shipment to the United States was the appraised value less buying commission on the invoice. There was no higher foreign value for such or similar merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeal to Reap-praisement enumerated above may be submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value was the appraised value, less the item of buying commission shown on the invoice.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

         In connection with the Form 10-K of Virginia Commerce Bancorp, Inc. for
the year ended December 31, 2005, I, William K. Beauchesne, Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer of Virginia Commerce Bancorp, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

(1) such Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, 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 such Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2005, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Virginia Commerce Bancorp, Inc.


/s/ William K. Beauchesne
-------------------------------------------
William K. Beauchesne
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
No. 44093.

#### Protest 27113-K of Rogow & Fuse, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of paperweights similar to those the subject of *Woolworth*v. *United States*(26 C. C. P. A. 221, C. A. D. 20). The claim at 40 percent under paragraph 339 was therefore sustained.
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM

 

**We herebyconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements onForm S-8 (**SEC File Nos. 333-53448 and333-112958) of Fargo Electronics, Inc. of our report dated March 14, 2005, relating to the financial statements,financial statement schedule, management’s assessment of the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

 
| /s/  PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |   |
|---------------------------------|--------|
|                            |   |
| Minneapolis,  Minnesota         |   |
| March  14, 2005                 |   |

 

----
No. 61942.

#### E. C. Carter *&*Son, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 68222-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that the subject of *E. C. Carter & Son, Inc.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 368, C. D. 1889), the merchandise imported, or withdrawn from warehouse, prior to January 1, 1948, was held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 1529 (a), as modified by the trade agreement with France (T. D. 48346), and that imported, or withdrawn from warehouse, subsequent to said date was held dutiable at 35 percent under said paragraph, as modified by T. D. 51802.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8516 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

840 Front Street in Casselton, North Dakota, as the ‘‘Commander Delbert Austin Olson Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 23, 2024 

Mr. ARMSTRONG introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 840 Front Street in Casselton, North Dakota, 

as the ‘‘Commander Delbert Austin Olson Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. COMMANDER DELBERT AUSTIN OLSON POST 

4 OFFICE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 840 Front Street in Casselton, 

7 North Dakota, shall be known and designated as the 

8 ‘‘Commander Delbert Austin Olson Post Office’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8516 IH

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Commander Delbert 

5 Austin Olson Post Office’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
#### EDWARD NAYLOR, Sr., RESPONDENT, v. GEORGE H. KNAPP AND ALBERT MATHIAS, APPELLANTS.

Argued March 8, 1918

Decided June 17, 1918.

On appeal from the Supreme Court.

For the appellants, *Aaron V. Dawes.*

For the respondent, *James J. McGoogan.*

Per Curiam.

This action was brought to recover damages for breach of condition of a replevin bond in not returning an automobile awarded to defendant in replevin, who is plaintiff in this action. The automobile was not reclaimed by defendant in replevin suit, and was delivered to plaintiff in that suit, and while in his possession he caused it to be repaired. After judgment awarding return of the goods to Naylor, the plaintiff in this suit, Mathias, the obligor in the bond and the defendant, below, tendered a return upon payment of the bill for repairs, claiming that the car was subject to a garage lien for them. This Naylor refused to pay and thereupon the car was retained by the defendant in this action.

The plaintiff recovered in the District Court and its judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court. We think the judgment should be affirmed upon the ground that the tender of the ear ivas not unconditional, but subject to a claim for payment for repairs, without which no delivery would be made.

*254The Supreme Court determined that there was a valid lien and therefore the car was not returned as required by the condition of the bond. It is not necessary to determine in this case whether a legal lien can be created by one who holds an , automobile taken by virtue of a writ of replevin, or whether any lien existed in this ease, and in affirming this judgment we do not express any opinion on that question.

The plaintiff’s right to recover had a sufficient basis if rested on the fact that the tender was not unconditional but subject to a demand for payment. The condition of the bond requires a return of the chattel, and a tender of the character present in this case is not a return of the goods awarded.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

*For affirmance*— The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Swayze, Parker, Bergen, Kalisch, Black, White, Heppenheimer, WILLIAMS, TAYLOR, JJ. 11.

*For reversal*— None.
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

I, Mark Shelley, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Sunergy, Inc. for the period
          ended June 30, 2010 (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 Sunergy, Inc.

Dated: June 29, 2011
                                         /s/ Mark Shelley
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Mark Shelley
                                         Secretary, Treasurer and Director
                                         (Principal Financial Officer and
                                         Principal Accounting Officer)
                                         Sunergy, Inc.

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
required by Section 906, has been provided to Sunergy, Inc. and will be retained
by Sunergy, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 60 (Thursday, March 29, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 14848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5806]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 5680]

Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy; Notice of 
Committee Renewal

    Renewal of Advisory Committee. The Department of State has renewed 
the Charter of the Advisory Committee on International Economic Policy. 
The Committee serves in a solely advisory capacity concerning major 
issues and problems in international economic policy. The Committee 
provides information and advice on the effective integration of 
economic interests into overall foreign policy and on the Department of 
State's role in advancing American commercial interests in a 
competitive global economy. The Committee also appraises the role and 
limits of international economic institutions and advises on the 
formulation of U.S. economic policy and positions.
    This Committee includes representatives of American organizations 
and institutions having an interest in international economic policy, 
including representatives of American business, labor unions, public 
interest groups, and trade and professional associations. The Committee 
meets at least annually to advise the Department on the full range of 
international economic policies and issues.
    For further information, please call Nancy Smith-Nissley, Senior 
Coordinator, Office of Economic Policy Analysis and Public Diplomacy, 
Economic, Energy and Business Bureau, U.S. Department of State, at 
(202) 647-1682.

    Dated: February 20, 2007.
David Burnett,
Director, Office of Economic Policy Analysis and Public Diplomacy, 
Bureau of Economic, Energy and Business Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E7-5806 Filed 3-28-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-P
```
#### Henry J. Koster v. The People.

■Where a statute enumerates several elements as combining to create a crime, the crime cannot properly be described without including all these elements.

Under the statute which punishes M every person who shall break and enter, in the night time, any office, shop, railroad depot or warehouse, not adjoining to or occupied with a dwelling house,” with intent to commit a felony, an information which fails to describe the building entered as “not adjoining to or occupied with a dwelling house,” is fatally defective.

*Submitted on brief July 5th.*

*Decided July 9th.*

Error to Ionia Circuit.

Plaintiff in error was convicted on an information which *432charged that he, “on the 13th day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty-nine, about the hour of ten o’clock in the night time of the same day, with force and arms, at the township aforesaid, in the county aforesaid, the storehouse of one John Vaughn, there situate, feloniously and burglariously did break and enter, with intent the goods and chattels of the said John Vaughn, in the said storehouse then and there being found, then and there feloniously and burglariously to steal, take, and carry away; and a large quantity of pork, of the value of six dollars, of the goods and chattels of the said John Vaughn, in the said storehouse then and there feloniously and burglariously did steal, take and carry away, against the form of the statute,” <fcc.

*JBell &*Soule, for plaintiff in error.

There was no appearance for the People.

Campbell J.:

The statute iinder which this prosecution is had punishes “ every person who shall break and enter, in the night time, any office, shop, railroad depot or warehouse, not adjoining to or occupied with a dwelling house,” with intent to commit felony.

It is a plain principle of law, that where the statutes ommerate several elements as combining to create a crime, the crime can not properly be described without including all these elements. An entry into a shop or warehouse in the night, with intent to commit a felony, is not a crime under this statute unless it also appears that the shop or warehouse is neither adjoining to nor occupied with a dwelling. Burglary at common law must be committed in such a place as is within the definition of a dwelling, which term has received an enlarged signification. Entering other, buildings was not regarded in the same light. In making a pew crime, the Legislature have *433seen fit to select a peculiar class of buildings; and it can not be enlarged or varied.

The information is defective in not setting forth any offense known to our laws; and the judgment was therefore erroneous, and must be reversed.

Manning *&*Ciiristiancy JJ. concurred.

Martin Cii. J. was absent.
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2011-1168

Directorate Identifier: 2010NM239AD

767-53A0209 --- 9/30/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
EXHIBIT 15

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos.
333-121901, 333-12064, 333-88172, 333-112755, 333-130907, 333-121901 and
333-149657 on Form S-8 and Nos. 333-83522, 333-104147, 333-13806 and 333-145431
and 333-152119 on Form F-3, of our report, dated March 31, 2009, relating to the
consolidated financial statements of Metalink Ltd. (the "Company") for the year
ended December 31, 2008, (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and
includes an explanatory paragraph regarding going concern uncertainty),
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of the Company.


By: /s/ Brightman Almagor & CO.
-------------------------------

BRIGHTMAN ALMAGOR & CO
Certified Public Accountants (Israel)
A member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

Tel Aviv, Israel
Date: June 29, 2009
No. 64963.

Suit 5057.

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

C.D. 2197. (Appeal dismissed October 10, 1960.)
| (1)   | the      quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Debut Broadcasting Corporation Inc. for      the quarter ended September 30, 2009 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 quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter      ended September 30, 2009, fairly presents in all material respects, the      financial condition and results of operations of Debut Broadcasting      Corporation Inc. |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | By:    | /s/ Ronald Heineman              |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------|
|   | Name:  | Ronald      Heineman             |
|   | Title: | Principal      Executive Officer |
|   | Date:  | November      11, 2010           |
|   |   |                             |
|   |   |                             |
|   | By:    | /s/ Sariah Hopkins_              |
|   | Name:  | Sariah      Hopkins              |
|   | Title: | Principal      Financial Officer |
|   | Date:  | November      11, 2010           |

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tyrone Williams, Appellant.

[635 NYS2d 491]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Byrne, J.), rendered December 2, 1994, convicting him of escape in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant’s request for new counsel since the defendant failed to show good cause for a substitution *(see, People v Sides, 75*NY2d 822; *People v Nunez,*186 AD2d 764). Moreover, contrary to his contention, the defendant received the effective assistance of counsel *(see, People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137). The defendant’s attorney negotiated an advantageous plea agreement that substantially limited the defendant’s exposure to imprisonment *(see, People v Ladelokun,*192 AD2d 723; *People v Nicholls,*157 AD2d 1004). Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Copertino, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.
No. 54754.

#### Ignaz Strauss & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 158300-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protest was dismissed.
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 Ableauctions.com, Inc. Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Report) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Abdul Ladha, Chief Executive Officer and 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 of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Dated:  January 23, 2008  /s/ Abdul Ladha Abdul Ladha Chief Executive Officer & Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-33382) pertaining to the 2000 Stock Incentive Plan and 2001 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan of Websense, Inc. of our report dated January 19, 2001, with
respect to the financial statements of Websense, Inc. included in the Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2000.

Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of Websense, Inc.
listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In
our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when considered
in relation to the basic financial statements, taken as a whole, presents fairly
in all material respects the information set forth therein.


                                                     ERNST & YOUNG LLP

San Diego, California
March 28, 2001
#### Walter P. Tillman, *Plaintiff, v.*Ellen Augusta Davis and others, *Defendants.*

— Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Yan V orst, J.
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 Ivision Group Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Roger Boileau, CFO and Principal Accounting 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; and



(2)

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







Date:  December 4, 2006

By:  /s/ Roger Boileau

Name:  Roger Boileau

Title:    Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer)
#### Charles E. Beard, *Respondent, v.*Daniel S. Cridler, *Appel*lant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Opinion by Macombee, J.