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

          - [Public Notice 5732]

*Summary:*                     Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.*; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, and Delegation of Authority No. 257 of April 15, 2003 [68 FR 19875], I hereby determine that the object, Nicolas Pouissin's Landscape with Saint Francis, to be included in the exhibition “Poussin and Nature”, imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, is of cultural significance. The object is imported pursuant to a loan agreement with the foreign owner or custodian. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit object at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, from on or about February 12, 2008, until on or about May 11, 2008, and at possible additional venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    .                

*For Further Information Contact:*                     For further information, including a list of the exhibit object, contact Wolodymyr Sulzynsky, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (                    *telephone:*                     (202) 453-8050). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001.                

Dated: March 22, 2007.

C. Miller Crouch,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

 [FR Doc. E7-5684 Filed 3-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
#### Alice T. Cook, *as Executrix, etc., Respondent, v.*Joseph G. Randall, App*ellant, Impleaded, etc.*

Judgment of County Court affirmed. (See *Correl*v. *Morse,*decided in this department in June, 1879.)
---

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Frederick Vandenberg, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
  that the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A  of Destiny Media Technologies, Inc. for
  the year ended August 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section
  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that
  the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents,
  in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
  of Destiny Media Technologies, Inc. (the Company)



| | By:    | /s/ Fred
      Vandenberg
| | ------ | -------------------------
| |        |                          
| | Name:  | Frederick Vandenberg     
| |        |                          
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer  
| |        |                          
| | Date:  | March 12, 2010           



This written statement is being furnished to the Securities
  and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Companys Annual Report on
  Form 10-K/A . A signed original of this 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.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form
    10-K/A  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not,
  except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for
  purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 10934, as amended (the
  Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated
  by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or
  the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates
  it by reference.



---
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 19, 2015

No. 04-14-00735-CV

Brian C. SIMCOE,

Appellant

v.

Thomas Christopher and Catrina Christ

Thomas CHRISTOPHER and Catrina Christopher,

Appellees

From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-CI-15519

Honorable Barbara Hanson Nellermoe, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Appellee’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief has this date been received 

and filed in the above styled and numbered cause. Extension of time to file the Appellee’s brief 

is this date GRANTED. Time is extended to April 6, 2015.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: ____________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE

CLERK OF COURT

cc: Sarah Lishman

Jamie Graham & Associates, PLLC

Tower Life Building

3110 S. St. Mary's, Suite 845

San Antonio, TX 78205

James Rodriguez

Law Office of James A. Rodriguez

540 S Saint Marys St

San Antonio, TX 78205-3418

Jamie L. Graham

Jamie Graham & Associates, PLLC

Tower Life Building

310 S. St. Mary's St., Suite 845

San Antonio, TX 78205
32.2 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






In connection with the Quarterly Report of Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund V, (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kimberly A. Springsteen-Abbott, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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; 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/Kimberly A. Springsteen-AbbottKimberly A. Springsteen-AbbottPrincipal Financial OfficerMay 16, 2011
No. 47975.

#### Protest 835131-G of Sterling Bag Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

From the record it does not appear that the jute cloth was marked in such manner as to indicate the country of origin but the bales were marked with the word “Italia.” The importer was required to mark them “Made in Italy” before they were released. In view of Abstracts 43272 and 43898 the court found that the marking “Italia” was sufficient and that the bales therefore were legally marked. Following *Kraft*v. *United States*(22 C. C. P. A. 111, T. D. 47103) the merchandise was held not subject to the additional duty.
EXHIBIT 8.1



List of Subsidiaries



Other than Mirae America, Inc., a California corporation, and Mirae (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd., a Hong Kong corporation, Mirae held a shareholding interest in
30 companies as of December 31, 2004, all of which were Korean corporations. Set forth below is a list of such companies and Miraes percentage of shareholding interest in them.



|                             |  |           
|---------------------------- |  | ----------
|Company Name                 |  | Percentage
|SoftForum Co., Ltd           |  | 41.51     
|MR Tech Town Co.             |  | 100.00    
|Mirae Online, Co., Ltd.      |  | 67.47     
|Korea Internet.com Co., Ltd. |  | 87.38     
|Alpha Logics Co., Ltd.       |  | 100.00    
|Mirae America, Inc.          |  | 50.00     
|AIO Corporation              |  | 21.63     
|Cyber Bank Co., Ltd          |  | 28.25     
|On-net Corporation           |  | 14.71     
|Intro System Co., Ltd.       |  | 15.16     
|JIT Corporation              |  | 3.65      
|Nara Vision                  |  | 17.43     
|NetThru                      |  | 19.73     
|Infinity Telecom Co., Ltd.   |  | 16.70     
|Telefree Co., Ltd.           |  | 2.57      
|Streambox Korea              |  | 5.11      
|NeoBill Co., Ltd.            |  | 4.37      
|Mobens Co., Ltd.             |  | 15.09     
|Mirae (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd.  |  | 99.00     
|Linxtek Co., Ltd.            |  | 1.22      
|Seoul Venture Base           |  | 5.69      
|EON Group                    |  | 1.33      
|CAMIS Co., Ltd.              |  | 0.26      
|YESS World Inc.              |  | 0.72      
|Sunwoo Information system    |  | 1.00      
|Dabonet Co., Ltd.            |  | 0.79      
|Digital Photo Corporation    |  | 0.93      
|Telinker                     |  | 0.75      
|E-GIOS Corporation           |  | 1.59      
|Hackers Lab Co., Ltd.        |  | 1.47      
|Interchem Korea              |  | 8.00      
|Imobiz                       |  | 2.32
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1


    WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of
Global Energy Group, Inc. (the "Company"), each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 that, to such person's knowledge, on the date hereof:

(a)      the Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2002
         filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission
         (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
         Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act or 1934; and

(b)      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the condition and results of operations of the
         Company.



/s/      Joseph H. Richardson
------------------------------------
Name:  Joseph H. Richardson
Title: Chief Executive Officer
April 14, 2003


/s/      Peter E. Toomey
------------------------------------
Name:    Peter E. Toomey
Title: Chief Financial Officer
April 14, 2003
Before the Second Division,

March 7, 1951

No. 55316.

#### Edward P. Paul & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

petition 6790-R (New York).

Opinion by Ford, J.

At the trial the president and general manager of petitioner testified that he had kept informed as to the market prices of the merchan*376dise by personal visits to the factories abroad; that he had also received quotations from the foreign manufacturers by mail; that the price which he paid for the merchandise in question was the price appearing on the invoice; and that he had previously imported book ends for which he paid a higher price, but that the instant items were smaller. Upon the record presented it was held that there was no intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the correct value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

LINDA S. RESTREPO AND CARLOS 

E. RESTREPO D/B/A 

COLLECTIVELY RDI GLOBAL 

SERVICES AND R&D 

INTERNATIONAL, 

§

§

§

No. 08-14-00288-CV

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 5

Appellants, §

of El Paso County, Texas

v. § (TC# 2012DCV04523)

§

ALLIANCE RIGGERS & 

CONSTRUCTORS, LTD.,

Appellee.

§

§

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is before the Court on its own motion to determine whether the appeal should 

be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellants’ notice of appeal indicates they seek to appeal

an order of the trial court refusing to set for a hearing Appellants’ motion to declare Alliance 

Riggers & Constructors, Ltd. to be a vexatious litigant.1 The basis for the trial court’s order is 

that Alliance Riggers filed a motion to determine that Appellants are vexatious litigants before 

Appellants filed their motion and that Alliance Riggers’ motion had been set for a hearing. On 

the date Appellants filed the notice of appeal, the Court gave notice of its intent to dismiss the 

 

1

 See TEX.CIV.PRAC. & REM.CODE ANN. §§11.051, 11.053 (West 2002). 
2

appeal for want of jurisdiction and provided Appellants with an opportunity to show grounds for 

continuing the appeal. Appellants filed a petition for writ of prohibition in cause number 08-14-

00292-CV, styled In re Linda S. Restrepo and Carlos E. Restrepo, Relators, but they have not 

filed a response to our inquiry regarding jurisdiction of this appeal.2

It is well settled that appellate courts have jurisdiction over final judgments, and such 

interlocutory orders as the Legislature deems appealable by statute. Lehmann v. Har-Con 

Corporation, 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001); Ruiz v. Ruiz, 946 S.W.2d 123, 124 (Tex.App.--El 

Paso 1997, no pet.); TEX.CIV.PRAC. & REM.CODE ANN. § 51.014 (West Supp. 2014)(authorizing 

appeals from certain interlocutory orders). It is undisputed that the order Appellants attempt to 

challenge in this appeal is interlocutory. There is no statutory provision authorizing an appeal 

from the trial court’s order refusing to set Appellants’ vexatious litigant motion for a hearing. 

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX.R.APP.P. 42.3(a).

STEVEN L. HUGHES, Justice

November 7, 2014

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.

 

2

 The Court has also dismissed the petition for writ of prohibition for want of jurisdiction.
#### Amos H. Crawford, *Respondent, v.*Alonzo Goddard, *Appellant*

— Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8658 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8658

 To require a report by the Transportation Security Administration on 
          digital identity ecosystems, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 7, 2024

   Mr. Higgins of Louisiana introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Homeland Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require a report by the Transportation Security Administration on 
          digital identity ecosystems, 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 ``Emerging Digital Identity Ecosystem 
Report Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. TSA REPORT ON DIGITAL IDENTITY ECOSYSTEMS.

    Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration 
shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs of the Senate a report describing the current state of digital 
identity ecosystems and the homeland security value of emerging digital 
identity ecosystems in the transportation sector, including related 
benefits and risks, and how such current and emerging ecosystems may 
better protect homeland security and increase the competitive advantage 
of the United States. Such report shall, to the maximum extent 
practicable, include perspectives from the private sector and State, 
local, Tribal, and territorial governments relating thereto.
                                 <all>
```
(V.D. 97)

#### Compass Instrument *&*Optical Co. et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 764802, etc.

(Decided January 20, 1959)

*Brooks & Brooks*for the plaintiffs.

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

Lawrence, Judge:

This is a valuation proceeding which arose by virtue of the judgment issued by the second division of this court in the case of *Compass Instrument & Optical Co.*v. *United States,*38 Cust. Ct. 475, Abstract 60663, wherein the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement, pursuant to the provisions of title 28, U.S.C. § 2636(d).

The parties to this proceeding have stipulated and agreed as follows:

> 1. That the merchandise consists of drawing sets and cases which were held by the Court in Compass Instrument & Optical Co., Inc. v. United States, Abstract 60663, to be the subject of appraisement separately according to the valúe of each class of articles.

> 2. 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 the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, was as shown on the attached schedule.

> 3. That there was no higher foreign value.

Upon the agreed facts, I find and hold that export value, as such value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1402(d)), is the proper basis for determining the value of the drawing instruments and cases therefor covered by the remand of protests enumerated in the schedule, attached to and forming part of this decision, and that such value is as shown in schedule “A,” attached to and made part of this decision.

I further find and hold such values to be the proper dutiable values of said merchandise.

As to all other merchandise, the remand is dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
**JK** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 18 - 0 562 STATE OF MONTANA ,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JEDEDIAH KEITH LARSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for an 60 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is gran ted a n extension of time to and including June 2 , 2020 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief.

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

March 26 2020

03/26/2020

Case Number: DA 18-0562
No. 45071.

#### Protest 999305-G of M. Pressner & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the pipe kazoos in question are in chief value of metal. On the authority of Abstract 44122 the claim at 45 percent under paragraph 397 was sustained.
No. 47453.

#### Protest 73244-K of Alpha Lux Co. (Philadelphia).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

It appeared from the testimony that the merchandise in question is imported in a knocked-down condition. The vice president of the importing company testified that the apparatus comes in a case with parts separated and that they are assembled in the United States; that the machine consists of a balance, on which the sample of the sand to be tested for moisture is weighted in the shop or foundry, and stated that a sample of the sand is placed in the cap of the shaker and a measured amount of reagent (calcium carbide) is also placed therein; that it is held horizontally so it does not mix, the cap is put on and the operator shakes the shaker which causes the carbide to react with moisture in the sand, forming acetylene gas; that the pressure of that gas is translated by this gauge or machine to the percentage of moisture; and that it is used in foundries as a “control machine on moistures in sands,” the moisture registering on the dial. He also testified that there were five separate parts of the machine, and a gauge identical in construction with the one located in the base of said shaker was admitted as illustrative exhibit A. He further testified that the gauge is screwed in, a gas is produced which enters into a tube, the tube being expanded by the pressure; and that “there is a link connecting the tube with a ratchet gear, so that when the tube is straightened out the lever pulls'the gear, which in turn actuates a pinion gear on which the needle sits, which points on the dial, so that as your pressure goes up and your needle goes up it definitely points to the moisture that is in the sand.” He stated that this is a mechanical arrangement of a tube, levers, and gears, to translate the pressure to percentage of moisture. On the record presented it was found that the so-called speedy moisture tester is a mechanical contrivance which utilizes, modifies, and applies energy or force for the transmission of motion. Following *Simon, Buhler & Baumann (Inc.)*v. *United States*(8 Ct. Cust. Appls. 273, T. D. 37537) the merchandise was found to be a machine and held dutiable at 27)4 percent ad valorem under paragraph 372 as claimed.