alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 8604)

#### The Mengel Company *v.*United States

Entry No. 167.

(Decided June 22, 1956)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

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

Rao, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that the market value or price at the time of exportation of the mer*622chandise involved herein, 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, is as follows:

All items, U. S. $21. per thousand square feet, net packed.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher foreign value for the merchandise herein at the time of exportation.

IT IS FURTHER AGREED that this case may be submitted 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 United States $21 per thousand square feet, net packed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Elster Group SE (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: March 10, 2011
/s/ Simon Beresford-WylieName: Simon Beresford-WylieTitle:   Chief Executive Officer/s/ Christoph Schmidt-WolfDated: March 10, 2011
Name: Christoph Schmidt-WolfTitle:   Chief Financial Officer
**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,Robert J. Zatta, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Reporton Form 10-Q of Rockwood Specialties Group, Inc. for the fiscal quarterended September 30, 2004 fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and thatinformation contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of Rockwood Specialties Group, Inc..

 
| Date:  November 15, 2004                             |   |
|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/  ROBERT J. ZATTA                                 |   |
| Robert  J. Zatta                                     |   |
| Senior  Vice President and   Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

----
No. 50118.

#### Protests 968105-G, etc., of Sprouse-Reitz Co., Inc., et al. (Portland, Oreg., etc.).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Before the Third Division,

April 26, 1945

No. 50143.

#### Protests 31397-K, etc., of Continental Ceramics Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise in question is similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Copeland & Thompson*v. *United States*(12 Cust. Ct. 85, C. D. 833). In accordance therewith the protests were sustained as claimed.
AFS-12-176-E February 16, 2012

Exemption No. 9292A Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2001-11043

Mr. Peter S. Rothwell Corporate Secretary and General Counsel Dassault Falcon Jet Corp. Teterboro Airport, 200 Riser Road Little Ferry, NJ 07643

Dear Mr. Rothwell:

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 9292, as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect, and lists the

conditions and limitations.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated January 18, 2012, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Adm inistration (FAA) on behalf of Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation (Dassault) for an extension of Exemption No. 9292, as amended. This exemption from §§ 47.65 and 47.69(b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) permits Dassault to obtain a Dealer’s Aircraft Registration Certificate without meeting the United States citizenship requirements and to conduct limited flights outside the United States under this certificate.

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption (Exemption No. 5315.)

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition

in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Dassault.2

Our Decision

The FAA has determ ined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 5315, as amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption. Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and §§ 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition.

Conditions and Limitations

1. The aircraft m ust be owned by Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation.

2. The aircraft must have a temporary registration number or an assigned registration number affixed as provided by 14 CFR part 45.

3. When the aircraft does not have a standard airworthiness certificate, permission of the host country (countries) must be obtained be fore flights to or through that country.

4. Dassault shall maintain records of each inte rnational flight for a period of one year after the aircraft returns to the United States, and such records to consist of: a) Registration number and manufacturer’s serial number; b) Dates of departure and return to the United States; and c) General overseas itinerary.

The Effect of Our Decision

A copy of this exem ption must be carried in each aircraft operated outside the United States. Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 9292, as amended, to May 31, 2014, unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 5315, as amended, remain the same. This letter must be attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 5315.

Sincerely,

/s/

John S. Duncan Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service
| (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 Company. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |                               |   |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------|--------|
|   | By:    | /s/ John R. Sprouls                |   |
|   |   | Name: John R. Sprouls              |   |
|   |   | Title: Principal Executive Officer |   |
|   |   |                               |   |
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 51 (Friday, March 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 12636]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-4839]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

 Office of the Secretary


Senior Executive Service; Appointment of Members to the 
Performance Review Board

    Title 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4) provides that Notice of the Appointment 
of an individual to serve as a member of the Performance Review Board 
of the Senior Executive Service shall be published in the Federal 
Register.
    The following individuals are hereby appointed to a three-year term 
on the Department's Performance Review Board: Howard M. Radzely, 
Catherine Murphy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Andrea Burckman, Director, Office 
of Executive Resources and Personnel Security, Room C5508, U.S. 
Department of Labor, Frances Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20210, telephone: (202) 693-7628.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of March, 2007.
Elaine L. Chao,
Secretary of Labor.
 [FR Doc. E7-4839 Filed 3-15-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-23-P
Exhibit 32.1


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

In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of The  Neptune  Society,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "Report"),  I, Jerry
A. Norman, Chief Executive Officer,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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; 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:  March 31, 2005            By:    /s/ Jerry A. Norman
                                        -----------------------------------
                                        Name:    Jerry A. Norman
                                        Title:   Chief Executive Officer
                                        (Principal Executive Officer)

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 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.
ex10-96.htm


Exhibit 10.75

 

 

EXTENSION OF MATURITY DATE OF WARRANTS

 

This Extension of Maturity Date of Warrants (“Extension”) is by and between the individual or entity named on the executed counterpart of the signature page hereto (such signatory is referred to as “Holder”) and OmniComm Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Maker”) and is entered into as of the day the Holder executes a copy of this Extension.

 

WHEREAS, Maker has delivered to Holder that certain 12% Promissory Note of the Maker (“Promissory Note”) dated January 1, 2013 in the aggregate to the Holder in the principal amount of $529,000. 

 

WHEREAS, the Maturity Date of the Promissory Note, as that term is defined in the Promissory Note, was January 01, 2016, and the principal due thereunder remains unpaid as of the date hereof.

 

WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to extend the Maturity Date of the Promissory Note to April 1, 2017.

 

WHEREAS, Holder has all requisite power, authority, and capacity to enter into this Extension and to extend the Maturity Date of the Warrants.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Holder and the Maker hereby agree as follows:

 

	 	
1.
	
Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.



 

	 	
2.
	
No Other Changes. Except as specifically set forth herein, all other terms and conditions of the Promissory Note remain in full force and effect.



 

	 	
3.
	
Warrants Extension. Maker hereby agrees to extend the expiration date on the Warrants issued in connection with the Promissory Note on January 1, 2013, which were originally scheduled to expire on January 31, 2016. The new expiration date is April 01, 2017.



 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Extension of Maturity Date of the Warrants associated with the Promissory Note is executed as of the day and date the Holder executes a copy of this Extension.

 

	
 
	
OmniComm Systems, Inc.

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
By: /s/ Thomas E. Vickers

	
 
	
             Thomas E. Vickers

	
 
	
             Chief Financial Officer



 

 

[HOLDERS SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]

 


 

 




 


 

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned represents that it has caused this extension of Maturity Date of Warrants to be duly executed on its behalf (if an entity, by one of its officers thereunto duly authorized) as of the date written below.

 

 

	
 
	
HOLDER:

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
Cornelis F. Wit

	
 
	
Printed Name of Holder

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
By: /s/ Cornelis F. Wit

	
 
	
(Signature of Holder or Authorized Person)

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
Printed Name and Title if Authorized Person

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
 

	
 
	
January 31, 2015

	
 
	
Date
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

 

I, John R. Tuttle, President and Chief Executive Officer of DayStar Technologies, Inc., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of DayStar Technologies, Inc. for the period ended June 30, 2005; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof 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 financialinformation 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 officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I havedisclosed, based on our 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 and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: August 12, 2005
Exhibit 34.2

**Reportof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

The Boardof Directors

Citibank,N.A.:

 

We have examined management’sassertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Assertion of Compliance, that the Agency and Trust division of Citibank,N.A. (or “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’sRegulation AB for publicly-issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended) and certain privately issued (i.e., for which transaction-level reporting is required pursuant to contractual obligation)automobile loan or lease-backed securities, equipment loan-backed securities and student loan-backed securities issued on or afterJanuary 1, 2006 for which the Company provides trustee and paying agent services (the “Platform”), except for servicingcriteria 1122(d)(1)(i)-1122(d)(1)(iv), 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(2)(iii), 1122(d)(2)(vi)-1122(d)(2)(vii), 1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(i)-1122(d)(4)(xv),which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities it performs with respect to the Platform, as of and for thetwelve months ended December 31, 2011. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conducted in accordancewith the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States)****and, accordingly, included examining,on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria specified above and performing suchother procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing selected asset-backed transactionsand securities that comprise the Platform, testing selected servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whetherthe Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria.Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company duringthe period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred either priorto or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the periodcovered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonablebasis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with the servicingcriteria.

 

In our opinion, management’sassertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the twelve months ended December 31,2011 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

 

/s/ KPMG LLP

 

Chicago, Illinois

February 28, 2012
Exhibit 32.2




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




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of ChinaCast Education Corporation on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Antonio Sena, Chief Financial Officer of
ChinaCast Education Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:




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




2. The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of ChinaCast Education
Corporation.




Dated
      August 9, 2010
                /s/ Antonio SenaAntonio SenaChief Financial Officer (Principal
                  Accounting and
      Financial Officer)
No. 61416.

protest 276462-K (New York).

#### J. Kalberman Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

At the trial, the defendant moved in evidence the “Memorandum To Accompany Invoice” (exhibit A) and “Memorandum re Protest” (exhibit B), from which exhibits it appears that the articles in question do not have any gold content. On the record presented, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 32.3



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF

UCDP FINANCE, INC.

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the quarterly report of UCDP Finance, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 3, 2005 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert K. Gault, Jr. certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: May 16, 2005



By:

/s/ ROBERT K. GAULT, JR.Robert K. Gault, Jr. President (Principal Executive Officer)