alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Shenzhen        Commercial Bank**

**Loan        Certificate**

| Applicant                                    |   | Shenzhen                BAK Battery Co., Ltd                |   | ID                card of the Applicant      |   | 73109958-5                               |
|----------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|
| Currency                                     |   | RMB                                                         |   | Amount                                       |   | 50,000,000                               |
| Loan                Term                     |   | From                June 20, 2007 to June 20, 2008          |
| Credit                Facility Agreement No. |   | (Shuibei)                Shouxinzi (2007) No. A110020700007 |
| Usage                                        |   | Working                Capital                              |   | Loan                type                     |   | Short-term                               |
| Signature                of Applicant        |   | Stamp                of Applicant                           |   | Signature                of China CITIC Bank |   | Stamp                of China CITIC Bank |
| /s/                Xiangqian Li              |   |                                                        |   | /s/Faling                Wei                 |   |                                     |
#### United States *v.*Alka Bottle Capping Machine Co.

No. 6064.

Invoice dated Linkoping, Sweden, September 12, 1938.

Certified September 13, 1938.

Entered at New York, N. Y., September 27, 1938.

Entry No. 735059.

Third Division, Appellate Term

(Order dated October 30, 1944)

*Paul P. Bao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the appellant.

*Baer & Marks*for the appellee.

Before Cline, Keeee, and Ekwall, Judges

ORDER

Cline, Judge:

Paul P. Rao, Assistant Attorney General and ■counsel for appellant herein, having moved to dismiss the above-entitled application for review, and counsel for appellee having ■consented to such motion, it is hereby- — •

Ordered that said application for review be and the same hereby is dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1406 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1406

  To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 510 
  19th Street, Bakersfield, California, as the Myron Donovan Crocker 
                       United States Courthouse.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 22, 2011

 Mrs. Boxer (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment 
                            and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To designate the United States courthouse under construction at 510 
  19th Street, Bakersfield, California, as the Myron Donovan Crocker 
                       United States Courthouse.

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

SECTION 1. MYRON DONOVAN CROCKER UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The United States courthouse under construction, 
as of the date of enactment of this Act, at 510 19th Street, 
Bakersfield, California, shall be known and designated as the ``Myron 
Donovan Crocker United States Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the United States 
courthouse referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a 
reference to the ``Myron Donovan Crocker United States Courthouse''.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED February 22, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40375 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee

v. MARTINDALE F MCLYMONT Defendant - Appellant

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:02-CR-141-2

-------------------- Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Martindale F . McLymont has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). McLymont has filed a response. Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and McLymont’s response, discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
#### In re: Kelvin J. MILES, Petitioner.

No. 05-6703.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 17, 2005.

Decided Sept. 21, 2005.

Kelvin J. Miles, Petitioner pro se.

Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Kelvin J. Miles petitions this court for a writ of mandamus. He seeks review of a recent district court decision denying his petition filed pursuant to the All Writs Act. Mandamus is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary situations. *See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court,*426 U.S. 394, 402, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976); *In re Beard,*811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir.1987). Mandamus relief is only available when there are no other means by which the relief sought could be granted, *Beard,*811 F.2d at 826, and may not be used as a substitute for appeal. *In re Catawba Indian Tribe,*973 F.2d 1133, 1135 (4th Cir.1992). The party seeking mandamus relief carries the heavy burden of showing that he has no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires and that his entitlement to such relief is clear and indisputable. *Allied Chem. Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc.,*449 U.S. 33, 35, 101 S.Ct. 188, 66 L.Ed.2d 193 (1980). Miles has failed to make the required showing. We deny the motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and for appointment of counsel and dismiss the petition. 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 decisional process.

*PETITION DISMISSED*
(Reap. Dec. 9600)

#### New York Merchandise *Co., Inc. v.*United States

Entry No. W12843, etc.

(Decided February 19, 1960)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

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

Johnson, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated on the attached schedule have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the export value of the merchandise covered by the Nanri Trading Co. Ltd. invoices embraced by the Appeals to Reappraisement enumerated on the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof at which time such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for export to the United States including cost of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise ready for shipment to the United States was the appraised unit values less 5% buying commission as stated on the invoices.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeals to Re-appraisement enumerated on the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof are limited to to [sic] Nanri Trading Oo. Ltd. invoices and abandoned in all other respects.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher foreign value for merchandise such or similar to the merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeals to Re-appraisement enumerated on the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof may be submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

■ On tbe agreed facts, I find that the export value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise covered by the Nanri Trading Co., Ltd., invoices embraced by these appeals and that such value is the appraised unit values, less 5 per centum buying commission, as stated on the invoices.

As to all other merchandise and in all other respects, the appeals, having been abandoned, will be dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-3271-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for the State of Colorado (FEMA-3271-EM), dated January 7, 2007, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

January 12, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of an emergency declaration for the State of Colorado is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared an emergency by the President in his declaration of January 7, 2007: 

Baca, Bent, Crowley, Prowers, and Pueblo Counties for emergency protective measures (Category B), including snow removal, under the Public Assistance program for any continuous 48-hour period during or proximate to the incident period. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison, 

Under Secretary for Federal Emergency Management, and Director of FEMA.

[FR Doc. E7-884 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
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 Amendment to the Quarterly Report of China BAK Battery, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report). I, Li Xiangqian, Chief Executive 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:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 22, 2006



By:

/s/ Li XiangqianLi XiangqianChief Executive Officer
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

# United States Court of Appeals
**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

ELOY MASCORRO,

Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, THE SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE SAN DIEGO CHIEF OF POLICE, OFFICERS 1

- 4, Defendants

- Appellees

______________________

2024

- 1497

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Southern District of California in No. 3:21

- cv

- 01725

- RSH

DDL, Judge Robert S. Huie.

___ ___________________

Before C HEN

, L INN

, and H UGHES

, Circuit Judges

.

P ER C URIAM

.
O R D E R

Eloy Mascorro appeal s from the United States District
Court for the Southern District of California’s dismissal of his civil rights action against the listed d efendants. In response to the court’s March 14, 2024 order to show cause, Mr. Mascorro urges transfe r to the United S tates Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Case: 24-1497 Document: 8 Page: 1 Filed: 04/11/2024MASCORRO v. CITY OF SAN DIEGO 2

Our jurisdiction to review decisions of federal district

courts generally extends only to cases arising under the patent laws, see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1); civil actions on review

to the district court from th e United States Patent and Trademark Office, see § 1295(a)(4)(C); or cases involvingcertain damages claims against the United States “not exceeding $10,000 in amount,” 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(2); 28 U.S.C. § 1292(c)(1). This case is outside of that limited subject matter jurisdiction. We may transfer to another court, if it is in the interest of justice, where “the action or appeal could have been brought at the time it was filed.” 28 U.S.C. § 1631. Here, the court concludes it appropriate to transfer to the Ninth Circuit. 28 U.S.C. §§ 41, 1291.

Accordingly,

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

The appeal and all its filings are transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

A pril 11 , 2024
Date F OR THE C OURT Case: 24-1497 Document: 8 Page: 2 Filed: 04/11/2024
March 23 , 2015

Mr. Ivan Boisson

Multimedia Systems Tech LLC

2436 Land O Lakes Boulevard

Land O Lakes, FL 34639

Dear Mr. Boisson :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption. It

explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can n o t Process Your Request

We entered your J anuary 22 , 2015 exemption request on behalf of Bruce Beard LLC into the

public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

- 0167 , but we are unable to process your request any further.

The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed).

For us to conside r the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

• The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief and th e extent of

the relief you seek

.

• The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

• Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

W hat You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exempti on.2

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9521

.

Sincerely,

/s/

Jake Troutman

Program Analyst , Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Before the Third Division,

May 20, 1944

No. 49429.

#### Protests 102490-K, etc., of Atlantic Grain Co., Inc., et al. (Buffalo).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise in question is the same in all material respects as that involved in *Richardson*v. *United States*(12 Cust. Ct. 6, C. D. 823), the protests were sustained.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
134633 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan TERRYL E. MASSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 134633 COA: 273798 Otsego CC: 01-009165-CH DOUGLAS J. HARDING and VALERIE ANN HARDING, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 24, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented shou ld be reviewed by this Court.

s1119 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 29, 2007

Clerk
Exhibit
32.1






CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 Pursuant
to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as President,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer of VSE Corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify that to the best of the undersigned's
knowledge:
 
 
 1) the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (the "Report"), fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934; and
 
 2) the information contained in the
Company's Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: July
      30, 2010
            /s/
      M. A. GauthierM.
      A. GauthierChief
      Executive Officer, Presidentand
      Chief Operating Officer
##### 



(a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that 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 controls and
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 internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
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 other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
 Date: January 13, 2006
    
    
    
    /s/ John H. MarmadukeJohn H. Marmaduke
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 164 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 164

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 13, 2007

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Authorizing the use of the Rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony to 
      award the Congressional Gold Medal to Dr. Norman E. Borlaug.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),  
That the Rotunda of the Capitol is authorized to be used on July 17, 
2007, for a ceremony to award the Congressional Gold Medal to Dr. 
Norman E. Borlaug. Physical preparations for the ceremony shall be 
carried 

              

out in accordance with such conditions as the Architect of the Capitol 
may prescribe.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 12, 2007.

            Attest:

                                            LORRAINE C. MILLER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 31


                AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED BY-LAWS

                                       OF

                         WALLACE COMPUTER SERVICES, INC.



         The following sets forth a first amendment to the Amended and Restated
By-Laws (the "By-Laws") of Wallace Computer Services, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, which amendment shall be effective September 10, 2002.

         1. Section 3.11 of the By-Laws has been deleted and amended to read in
its entirety as follows:

                  "Section 3.11. Compensation Committee.

                  (a) At each annual meeting of the Board of Directors, the
         Board of Directors shall, by a resolution adopted by a majority vote of
         the entire Board of Directors, designate and appoint from its members a
         Compensation Committee consisting of two or more directors, none of
         whom is an officer or employee of the corporation.

                  (b) The Compensation Committee shall have the powers and
         responsibilities set forth in the Compensation Committee charter
         adopted by the Board of Directors, as the same may be amended, modified
         and supplemented from time to time by the Board of Directors."