alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 9842)

#### Swizzels, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 13659; 13660; 16057.

(Decided November 17, 1960)

*Brooks & Brooks*for tbe plaintiff.

*George Coclvrcm Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for tbe defendant.

*Oliver,*Chief Judge;

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between tbe parties hereto, subject to tbe approval of tbe Court that;

> 1. Tbe merchandise involved in tbe instant case consists of confectionery imported from England;

> 2. That said merchandise was appraised on tbe basis of United States value;

> 3. That tbe facts with respect to tbe sale in tbe United States of tbe merchandise here involved are tbe same as those in *Swizzels, Inc.*v. *United States,*Reap. Decision 8794 and tbe issue herein is likewise tbe same;

> *4.*That *the record in*said case is incorporated in tbe record herein ;

> 5. That tbe cost of materials and fabrication, manipulation, or other process employed in manufacturing or producing such or similar merchandise at a time preceding tbe date of exportation of tbe involved merchandise which would ordinarily permit tbe manufacture of production thereof in tbe usual course of business, plus tbe usual general expenses (not less than 10 per centum of such cost) in tbe case of such or similar merchandise, plus tbe cost of all containers and coverings, and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing tbe merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States and plus an addition for profit, (not less than 8 per centum of tbe costs of materials and fabrication or manipulation and general expenses) equal to tbe profit which ordinarily is added, in tbe case of merchandise of tbe same general character, by manufacturers or producers in the country of manufacture who are engaged in tbe manufacture of merchandise of tbe same class or kind equals, for each item, invoice unit price, plus packing, plus drawback of 1 pence per pound of sugar content, and

> 6. That tbe instant appeal is submitted for decision on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts and following the cited decision on the law, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is cost of production, as defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, and hold that such statutory value for each item is the invoice unit price, plus packing, plus drawback of 1 pence per pound of sugar content.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 32.1



                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 Trinity Learning Corporation (the "Company")
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Douglas D. Cole, Chief Executive 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 and 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.


Date:  December 13, 2004

                                        /S/ DOUGLAS D. COLE
                                        -------------------
                                        Douglas D. Cole
                                        Chief Executive Officer



     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
     been provided to Trinity Learning Corporation and will be retained by it
     and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
     request.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 21 - 0407

_________________ IN THE MATTER OF: A.M.G. and S.M.H.,

Youth s in Need of Care . O R D E R

_________________ Appellant seeks a second thirty- day extension of time within which to submit a reply brief. Counsel for Appellant acknowledges this Court’s March 30, 2022 Order stating that further extensions would not be permitted but explains why additional time is needed in this ca se. C ounsel advises that the State has been contacted and does not oppose the request. Upon review of counsel’s affidavit, the Court finds good cause for the requested extension. Given the nature of the case, however, and the Court’s practice to expedite the submission of dependent-neglect cases, the Court will not permit additional extensions of time. If the brief is not filed on or before the extended due date , the case will be submitted on the opening brief and the State’s response. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Appellant is granted to and including June 1, 2022 , within which to file a reply brief in this matter.

Electronically signed by: Beth Baker Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 4 2022

05/04/2022
#### J. E. Bernard & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States

No. 6422.

Entry No. 753334, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, March 6, 1942, etc.

Certified March 26, 1942, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., June 4, 1942, etc.

(Decided October 7, 1946)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson (Sidney Mandell*of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Presiding Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

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 values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
H. Con. Res. 308 Agreed to May 7, 2008 

One Hundred Tenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eight 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 

SECTION 1. USE OF CAPITOL GROUNDS FOR NATIONAL PEACE OFFICERS’ MEMORIAL SERVICE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Grand Lodge of the Fraternal Order 

of Police and its auxiliary (in this resolution referred to as the 

‘‘sponsor’’) shall be permitted to sponsor a public event, the 27th 

annual National Peace Officers’ Memorial Service (in this resolution 

referred to as the ‘‘event’’), on the Capitol Grounds, in order to 

honor the law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty 

during 2007. 

(b) DATE OF EVENT.—The event shall be held on May 15, 

2008, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Rules and Administration of 

the Senate jointly designate. 

SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Under conditions to be prescribed by the 

Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board, the event 

shall be— 

(1) free of admission charge and open to the public; and 

(2) arranged not to interfere with the needs of Congress. 

(b) EXPENSES AND LIABILITIES.—The sponsor shall assume full 

responsibility for all expenses and liabilities incident to all activities 

associated with the event. 

SEC. 3. EVENT PREPARATIONS. 

Subject to the approval of the Architect of the Capitol, the 

sponsor is authorized to erect upon the Capitol Grounds such stage, 

sound amplification devices, and other related structures and equipment, as may be required for the event. 

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIONS. 

The Capitol Police Board shall provide for enforcement of the 

restrictions contained in section 5104(c) of title 40, United States 

Code, concerning sales, advertisements, displays, and solicitations 
H. Con. Res. 308—2 

on the Capitol Grounds, as well as other restrictions applicable 

to the Capitol Grounds, in connection with the event. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.
No. 39085.

#### Protest 907249-G of V. J. Hammer (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

No evidence was offered in support of the claims made. The protest was therefore overruled.
No. 40376.

#### Protests 960258-G, etc., of G. A. Westphal & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Sullivan, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel carved wooden figures similar to those the subject of *United States*v. *Abercrombie*(20 C. C. P. A. 267, T. D. 46060) and Abstract 22772 were held dutiable at *33 ¡4*percent under paragraph 412, and miniature dog figures in chief value of fur similar to those which were the subject of Abstract 30980 were held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 1519.
#### F. W. Woolworth Co. *v.*United States

No. 6102.

Invoice dated Sonneberg, Germany, January 16, 1939.

Certified January 18, 1939.

Entered at Boston, Mass., February 6, 1939.

Entry No. 8659.

(Decided February 23, 1945)

*Sharretts & Hillis (Edward P. Sharretts*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Bao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Daniel I. Auster,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Kincheloe, Judge:

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

> It is hereby stipulated by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, that the facts and circumstances *337relating to the item of 10 per centum commission in the case listed in the annexed schedule, identified on the invoice with “xx” in green ink and the initials T. A. McC. of Examiner Timothy A. McCarthy, are in all material respects the same as the facts and circumstances relating to the item of 10 per centum commission specified in the invoices relating to glass tree ornaments, novelties, and figures covered by reappraisements 113038-A, 113040-A, and 113468-A of the F. W. Woolworth Co. and passed upon by the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals in *United, States*v. *S. S. Kresge Co., B. Shackman & Co., Rice & Co. Corp., Strauss-Eckardt Co., Inc., F. W. Woolworth Co.,*26 C. C. P. A. 349, 352, wherein the court held that *“A*purchasing commission, charged for the handling of merchandise, is not a proper part of dutiable value.”

> It is further stipulated and agreed that on the date of exportation of the merchandise involved in the case listed in the annexed schedule, identified on the invoices with “xx” in green ink and the initials T. A. McC. of Examiner Timothy A. McCarthy, articles such and similar thereto were freely offered for sale and sold to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country of exportation in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States at the *per se*unit invoice prices, plus 3J4 per centum social assessments for insurance, vacation, and holiday costs, plus packing, as invoiced, and that there was no higher foreign value.

> As to all other items, the appeal is abandoned.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that the record in *United States*v. *S. S. Kresge Co. et al.,*26 C. C. P. A. 349, 352, be incorporated herein and that the said appeal to reappraisement is submitted on this 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-represented on the invoice by the items marked “xx” in green ink and the initials T. A. McO. of Examiner Timothy A. McCarthy, and that such values are the *per se*unit invoice prices, plus 3K per centum social assessments for insurance, vacation, and holiday costs, plus packing, as invoiced.

The appeal having been abandoned insofar as it relates to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeal is hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
October 7, 1957

Reap. Dec. 9005.

#### Elliot *Import Corp., et al.*v. *United States.*

Entered at New York, N. Y. [Not published.] Motion by plaintiffs.
EX-31 Rule13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications.

 

 

I, Anthony Sfarra,certify that:

 

1. I have reviewedthis report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respectof the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of the Wells Fargo CommercialMortgage Trust 2016-C33 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

 

2. Based on myknowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge,all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to beprovided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included inthe Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4. Based on myknowledge and the servicer compliance statements required in this report underItem 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Actperiodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under theservicing agreements in all material respects; and

 

5. All of the reportson assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securitiesand their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance withservicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in thisreport in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except asotherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliancedescribed in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated parties:

 

National CooperativeBank, N.A., as NCB Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer,National Cooperative Bank, N.A., as NCB Special Servicer, Wilmington Trust,National Association, as Trustee, Park Bridge Lender Services LLC, as OperatingAdvisor, CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc., as Servicing FunctionParticipant, National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing Function Participant,Trimont Real Estate Advisors, LLC, as Special Servicer for the 225 LibertyStreet Mortgage Loan, Wilmington Trust, National Association, as Trustee forthe 225 Liberty Street Mortgage Loan, Citibank, N.A., as CertificateAdministrator for the 225 Liberty Street Mortgage Loan, Citibank, N.A., asCustodian for the 225 Liberty Street Mortgage Loan, CoreLogic Commercial RealEstate Services, Inc., as Servicing Function Participant for the 225 LibertyStreet Mortgage Loan, and National Tax Search, LLC, as Servicing FunctionParticipant for the 225 Liberty Street Mortgage Loan.

 

 

 

Dated: March 21, 2018

 

 

/s/ Anthony Sfarra

 

President

(seniorofficer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
#### Eurasia Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 6275.

Entry No. 73270, etc.

Invoices dated Tokyo, Japan, July 1, 1940, etc.

Certified July 2, 1940, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., July 30, 1940, etc.

(Decided May 1, 1946)

*James W. Bevans*for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Kinci-ieloe, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

It is hereby stipulated and agreed, subject to the approval of the court:

1. That the merchandise covered by the reappraisements and entries enumerated in the attached schedule consists of cotton velveteens and corduroys in the piece exported from Japan.

2. That the merchandise was not freely offered for sale in Japan on the dates of exportation for home consumption.

*3553. That such merchandise was freely offered for sale to purchasers in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States at the time of exportation of the shipments covered by this stipulation, at the entered values in each case plus the commissions and control fees specified on the consular invoices covering such shipments.

4. That the cases aré submitted on this 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 values are the entered values in each case plus the commissions and control fees specified on the consular invoices covering such shipments.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Case No. 6,938.

#### HURST v. RODNEY.

[2 Wash. C. C. 49.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Pennsylvania.

April Term, 1807.

Execution aqaisst Real Estate — Notice op Sale.

Quere, whether under the act of the assembly of Pennsylvania of 1705, relative to the sale of lands taken in execution, personal notice of the time and place of the sale should not be given by the sheriff.

This was a rule to show cause why an execution issued against the defendant by the plaintiff [upon a judgment upon a verdict obtained in Case No. 0,937], and levied on the defendant's land, which had been sold; should not be set aside. The ground of the-motion was, that the defendant had not received personal notice of the time and place of sale; and it was founded on an act of the assembly of Pennsylvania, passed in 1705, c. 153, § 4; which directs, that before' any sale of land taken in execution .shall be-made, the officer shall cause so many writings to be made as the debtor shall reasonably require, or so many without such request, as may be sufficient to give notice of such sales, and of the day and hour when, and place where the same shall be, and what lands are to be sold, which notice shall be-given to the defendant; and the said papers-shall be fixed up by the officer in the most public places of the county, ten days before-the sale. The plaintiff showed cause, that the time and place of sale had been duly advertised in the public papers; and it was agreed, by the bar, that this had always been the practice, and that personal notice had been seldom given, and it was not deemed necessary.

THE COURT

observed that the words of the law were very strong indeed, and seemed to require personal notice; but that if evidence of notice could be brought home-to the defendant in any way, as that he had seen the paper in which it was advertised, ’ or that he took that paper, it might be sufficient; or even an acquiescence under the sale, if known to the defendant-might do. But as the uniform practice was-stated to be in conformity with the course pursued in this case, it might be an important consideration, whether it ought now to. be disturbed.

Before THE COURT gave any final opinion, the parties consented to setting aside-the sale; both being dissatisfied with it. The-purchaser of the property having also agreed to it.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF LOEWS CINEPLEX ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          48,174
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,590
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      4,462
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                85,267
<PP&E>                                       1,452,017
<DEPRECIATION>                                 332,040
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,806,201
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          197,094
<BONDS>                                        690,301
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           587
<OTHER-SE>                                     664,709
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,806,201
<SALES>                                        228,332
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               851,160
<CGS>                                           35,557
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  654,503
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               143,134
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              57,216
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,693)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,187
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,880)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,880)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.12)


</TABLE>
No. 55474.

#### F. H. Paul & Stein Bros. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 135565-K (S), etc. (New York).

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 covered by certain enumerated entries 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.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11** 
**- 1545** 

JANIS J. WEYBREW ,
Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (14868

- 10

- L )

Submitted : October 18, 2011 Decided: October 20, 2011

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Janis J. Weybrew, Appellant Pro Se. Gilbert Steven Rothenberg, Deputy Assistant Attorney Ge neral, Sara Ann Ketchum, Bridget Maria Rowan, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee

.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Janis J. Weybrew appeals the tax court ’ s order
sustaining the Commissioner’s collection determination and
imposing sanctions pursuant to I.R.C. § 6673 (2006) . We have

reviewed the record and the tax court’s opinion and find no
reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated
by the tax court. Weybr ew v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue , Tax

Ct. No. 14868

- 10

- L (U.S. Tax Ct. Feb. 16, 2011) . 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 decisio nal process.

AFFIRMED