alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 53099.

#### John Arthur Davison *v.*United States,

protests 64244-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the issue herein is the same in all material respects as that presented in *Mamary Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 135, C. D. 1142). In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries. The protests were sustained to this extent.
Exhibit 32.0











Section 1350 Certification of Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer













CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Naugatuck Valley
Financial Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as added
by § 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 the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | /s/ William C. Calderara                            
| | ----------------------------------------------------
| | William C. Calderara                                
| | President and Chief Executive Officer               
| |                                                     
| | /s/ James Hastings                                  
| | James Hastings                                      
| | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
| | (principal financial and accounting officer)        





March 31, 2014
No. 56057.

protest 170325-K (Baltimore).

#### John S. Connor *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Laweence, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise consist of steel scrap; that said scrap is a ferrous material in chief value of metal; and that it is secondhand or waste or refuse, fit only to be remanu-factured. Upon the agreed statement of facts, it was held that the merchandise comes within the provisions of Public Law 869, *supra,*and is properly entitled to free entry.
No. 47971.

#### Protests 963364-G, etc., of W. T. Grant Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall,

J. In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain of the figures in question are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Joseph Schmidt, Inc.*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 188, C. D. 690), the claim that they are not subject to countervailing duty under section 303 was sustained as to certain of the items.
Case No. 9,128a.

#### MARSHALL v. JEFFRIES.

[Hempst. 299.] 2

Superior Court, Territory of Arkansas.

Feb., 1836.

Pleading at Law — Misnomer—Idem Sonans.

“Jeffery” and “Jeffries” are not idem sonans.

Error to Lawrence circuit court.

Before JOHNSON and YELL,-JJ.

JOHNSON, J.

This is an action of trespass for an assault and battery, brought by Jeffries against [William B.] Marshall. Marshall pleaded a misnomer of the plaintiff named, alleging that he was called and known by the name of Jesse Jeffery, and not by the name of Jesse Jeffries. To this plea Jeffries demurred, and the demurrer was sustained. The only question for the consideration of this court, relates to the decision on the demurrer to the plea in abatement. We think the court erred in sustaining the demurrer to that plea. We do not think that Jeffery and Jeffries are the same name. They are differently.spelt, and clearly cannot be said to be idem sonans. The judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to permit the defendant in error to reply to the plea of misnomer, if he shall apply for leave to do so, and on his failure, then to give judgment in accordance with the plea in abatement. Reversed.
#### The People of the State of New York *v.*Jeremiah White

— Judgment affirmed. Opinion by Pratt, J.
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ N O . 09
- 23
- 00101
- CV

__________________ VERONICA FERNANDEZ AND ARTHUR FERNANDEZ , Appellant s V. JUST FOR SHOW ENTERTAINMENT LOGISTICS, INC. AND MICHAEL TODD JONES , Appellee s

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 457th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 21
- 09
- 13497
- CV

__________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION The trial court signed a final summary judgment on February 28, 2 0 23. Appellant s, Veronica Fernandez, Individually and on behalf of The Estate of Nicholas Fernandez, an d Arthur Fernandez , filed a notice of appeal on March 31,
2023. On May 1 , 2023, we notified the parties that the notice of appeal had been filed late , but with the extension t i me permitted by Rule 26.3, we notified A ppellant s that they could request an ext ension of time that included a reasonable explanation2 for the late filing of the motion. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. On June 20, 2023, we reminded the A ppellants that we had not received a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal, and we warned A ppellants that a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal must be filed by June 30, 2023. We further warned the parties that fai lure to establish the timely filing of a notice of appeal could result in dismissal of the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. A ppellants did not file a motion for extension of time to file their notice of appeal, as they had been direct ed in the clerk’s noti ce of June 20, 2023. Appellants failed to file a motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal or offer a reasonable explanation for the late filing of the notice of appeal. The Court finds that the notice of appeal was not timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. No motion for extension of time was filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. A ppellant s failed to comply with a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c). Accordingly, we dismis s the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3 , 43.2(f)

. APPEAL DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM Submitted on August 2, 2023 Opinion Delivered August 3, 2023 Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ROBERT MITAL,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 269 WAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 5th day of December, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
No. 64965.

#### Reliance International Mfg., Ltd. *v.*United States,

protest 60/1741 (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of parakeet playpens, composed in chief value of steel, the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Reliance International Mfg., Ltd.*v. *United States*(37 Cust. Ct. 182, C.D. 1820), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No, 52723.

protests 140265-K, etc. (New York).

#### The Silverite Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cereal or baby dishes similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Thorens, Inc.*v. *United States*(19 Cust. Ct. 67, C. D. 1069), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Exhibit 99.6





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


AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The Cash Store Financial Services Inc. (the “Company”) is filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, its annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2011 (the “Report”).





I, Gordon Reykdal, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(i)    the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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





By:

/s/ Gordon J. ReykdalName:

Gordon J. ReykdalTitle:

Chairman and Chief Executive OfficerDate:

November 16, 2011
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Distributed Energy
Systems Corp. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                   |  |                              
|------------------ |  | -----------------------------
|Dated: May 6, 2005 |  | /s/    WALTER W. SCHROEDER   
|                   |  | Walter W. Schroeder          
|                   |  | President                    
|                   |  | (Principal Executive Officer)



|                   |  |                                             
|------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------
|Dated: May 6, 2005 |  | /s/    JOHN A. GLIDDEN                      
|                   |  | John A. Glidden                             
|                   |  | Vice President of Finance                   
|                   |  | (Principal Financial and Accounting 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. The foregoing certification is accompanying the
Form 10-Q solely 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) and is not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.
#### The New York and Brooklyn Ferry Company, *Respondent, v.*The Mayor, etc., of the City of New York, Appellants.

Judgment reversed, new trial ordered, with costs .to abide the event. Opinion by Davis, P. J.
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



I, Susan Wong, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Tercica, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tercica, Inc.



Date: August 4, 2005



By:

/s/ Susan WongSusan WongActing Chief Financial Officer




This certification accompanies
the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Tercica, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
#### Louise Wood v. State.

176 So. 755.

Division A.

Opinion Filed October *28,*1937.

• *C:A. Avriett,*for Plaintiff in Error;

. *Cary D.*Landis, Attorney General, and *Roy Campbell,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Per Curiam.

The writ of error brings for review judgment of conviction of grand larceny.

The plaintiff in error and one Jack Miller were indicted and prosecuted jointly for the theft of a Ford Sedan automobile of the value of Six Hundred ($600.00) Dollars.

The contention of the plaintiff in error is that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment.

We have examined the record and find ample substantial evidence to. sustain the verdict and judgment and no reversible error being made to appear, the judgment should .be affirmed.

It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

Whitfield, P, J., concurs in the opinion and judgment.

Brown, J., dissents.

Chapman, J., disqualified.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JORGE A. LEGARRETA,

Appellant,

v.

CLAUDIA ALVIDREZ and THE OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

TEXAS,

Appellees. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 19

- 00301

- CV

Appeal from the

383rd District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC#2012DCM10214)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. We further order that Appellee s

recover from Appellant and h is sureties, if any, see T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 43.5, on the judgment and all

costs for which let execution issue. This decision shall be certified below for observance

.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2021.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox , and Alley, JJ.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Report to Congress [electronicresource].**
 
1995 (sections 8, 12, 17,and two images files unable to be converted to PDF due to file corruption)| (original Zip Filefor 1995 title (with files in .WPD and .WPG) | 1996| 1997 | 1998 | 1999
 
SuDoc Number:J 32.10/3:
Item Number:0718-E (online)
CGP systemNumber:000551998
 
August 15, 2024
#### John B. Cornell and others, *Appellants, v.*John Roach and others, *Respondents.*

— Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the opinion of Yan Yorst, J., in the court below.
SUBLEASE

This is an agreement to sublet real property between eLEC  Communications,  Inc.
and Cordia Corporation according to the terms specified below.

The  lessor  agrees to sublet,  and the  sublessor  agrees to take the  premises
described below. Both parties agree to keep, perform,  and fulfill the promises,
conditions and agreements expressed below:

1.   The lessor is eLEC Communications Corp.

2.   The subtenant is: Cordia Corporation

3.   The location of the premises is 509 Westport Avenue, Norwalk, CT 06851

4.   The term of this  sublease  is one (1) year,  beginning  4/1/01  and ending
     3/31/01.  The rent is $ 2,000.00  per month for 1500  square feet of office
     space, payable in advance on the 30th day of the month. The rent is payable
     to eLEC Communications Corp., 509 Westport Avenue, Norwalk, CT 06851

5.   The rent payment includes all charges for the use of the phone system;  two
     (2) server racks with  servers;  common area;  and parking  connected  with
     premises, as well as all utilities and phone service.

7.   Sublessor  agrees to  surrender  and deliver to the lessor the premises and
     all furniture and decorations within the premises in as good a condition as
     they were at the beginning of the term,  reasonable wear and tear excepted.
     The sublessor will be liable to the lessor for any damages occurring to the
     premises or the contents thereof or to the building,  which are done by the
     sublessor.

8.   This lease  constitutes  the sole  agreement  between  the  parties  and no
     additions,  deletions,  or  modifications  may be accomplished  without the
     written consent of both parties. (Any oral representations made at the time
     of  executing  this lease are not legally  valid,  and  therefore,  are not
     binding upon either party).

9.   The words "lessor" and "sublessor" as used herein indude the plural as well
     as the  singular;  the  language  of this  sublease  intends  no regard for
     gender.

10.  Each party signing this sublease acknowledges receipt of a copy thereof.

11.  The parties hereby bind  themselves to this  agreement by their  signatures
     affixed below on this 1st day of April, 2001

     Lessor                             Sublessor


     /s/ Paul Riss                      /s/ Craig Gironda
     --------------------------         ---------------------------
     Paul Riss                          Craig Gironda
     CEO                                CEO
Exhibit 32
 Certification pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (1)
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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.
  November 6, 2008
    /s/ Richard J. JarosinskiDate
    Richard J. Jarosinski, President and Chief Executive OfficerNovember 6, 2008
    /s/ John N. PesarsickDate
    John N. Pesarsick, Chief Financial Officer
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ROYER BORGES and EMELY DELFIN, as natural parents and 

guardians of ANTHONY BORGES,

Appellants,

v.

NIKOLAS CRUZ, SCOT PETERSON, ANDREW MEDINA, The Estate of

LYNDA CRUZ, JAMES SNEAD, KIMBERLY SNEAD, HENDERSON 

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, INC., and SOUTH COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH 

CENTER, INC.,

Appellees.

No. 4D19-1513

[May 27, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Patti Englander Henning, Judge; L.T. Case No. 18-8568 

(26).

Joel S. Perwin of Joel S. Perwin, P.A., Miami and Alex Arreaza of The 

Arreaza Law Firm, LLC, Wilton Manors, for appellants.

Eric J. Netcher and Joshua B. Walker of Walker, Revels, Greninger & 

Netcher, PLLC, Orlando, for appellee, Henderson Behavioral Health, Inc.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Pollack v. Cruz, No. 4D19-1512 (Fla. 4th DCA May 27, 

2020).

GROSS, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 58631.

petition 7098-R (West Palm Beach).

#### T. W. Holt, Sr., for and in behalf of T. W. Holt & Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

Prom the testimony, it appeared that at the time of entry of the instant merchandise, there arose a difference of opinion between the petitioner and the appraiser as to the correct value for the merchandise in issue; that, after several conferences between the broker and the appraiser, entries covering similar shipments were amended to conform to the value considered by the appraiser; that, by agreement of the parties, it was decided to make a test case of the instant petition to determine whether export value, contended for by the importer, or foreign value, determined applicable by the appraiser, was the proper basis for valuation purposes; and that the reappraisement litigation resulted in favor of the appraiser’s finding of foreign value. Upon consideration of the evidence, 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 value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
No. 47481.

#### Protest 84632-K of Ciba Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel 57 percent of Lyofix DEC pat., 34 percent of Ultravon WC pat., 41 percent of Albatex POC pat., 51 percent of Sapamine FLC pat., and 45 percent of Ultravon KC pat., were held taxable at 3 cents per pound under section 701, Revenue Act of 1936, as claimed.
<PAGE>

                                                                Exhibit 10.107.1

SCHEDULE IDENTIFYING SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL AGREEMENT(S) TO EXHIBIT 10.107


Reimbursement Agreement II, dated as of December 15, 1999, between Bayerische
Landesbank International S.A. and Midwest Generation, LLC.

         This Reimbursement Agreement differs from Exhibit 10.107 in the
following respects:


     In the first paragraph of the Recitals, "Collins Trust I" is replaced by
     "Collins Trust II.."

Reimbursement Agreement III, dated as of December 15, 1999,
between Bayerische Landesbank International S.A. and Midwest Generation, LLC.


         This Reimbursement Agreement differs from Exhibit 10.107 in the
following respects:

     In the first paragraph of the Recitals, "Collins Trust I" is replaced by
     "Collins Trust III."

Reimbursement Agreement IV, dated as of December 15, 1999,
between Bayerische Landesbank International S.A. and Midwest Generation, LLC.

         This Reimbursement Agreement differs from Exhibit 10.107 in the
following respects:

     In the first paragraph of the Recitals, "Collins Trust I" is replaced by
     "Collins Trust IV."
No. 56542.

protests 162685-K, etc. (New York).

#### Ciba Pharmaceutical Products, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
No. 46238.

#### Protests 836788-G, etc., of R. Alexander et al. (Los Angeles, etc.).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
(Reap. Dec. 9218)

#### Religious Distributing Company *v.*United States

Entry No. 818, etc.

(Decided September 4, 1958)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

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

Lawrence, Judge:

When the appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” attached to and made part of this decision, were called for hearing, there was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff.

An examination of the official record discloses no reason for disturbing the presumptively correct value for the merchandise found by the appraiser.

I, therefore, find and hold the proper dutiable value of the merchandise covered by these appeals to be the value found by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.