alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(Reap. Dec. 9022)

Entry No. 5283.

#### Andrew Fisher Cycle Co. *v.*United States

(Decided November 8, 1957)

*Brooks & Brooks*for the plaintiff.

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

Wilson, Judge:

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

> *698IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court,

> 1. That the merchandise here involved consists of bicycles imported from Germany for the account of plaintiff herein under the entry enumerated above,

> 2. That said bicycles were appraised on the basis of statutory cost of production,

> 3. That the cost of materials and fabrication, manipulation, or other process employed in manufacturing or producing such or similar merchandise at a time preceding the date of exportation of the involved merchandise which would ordinarily permit the manufacture of production thereof in the usual course of business, plus the usual general expenses (not less than 10 per centum of such cost) in the case of such or similar merchandise, plus the cost of all containers and coverings, and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, and plus an addition for profit (not less than 8 per centum of the costs of materials and fabrication or manipulation and general expenses) equal to the profit which ordinarily is added to the cost of merchandise of the same general character by manufacturers or producers in the country of manufacture who are engaged in the manufacture of merchandise of the same class or kind equals

> U. S. $14.73 each, plus cost of packing as invoiced.

> 4. That the reappraisement appeal herein may be submitted upon this stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402 (f) 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 dollars 14.73 each, plus cost of packing, as invoiced.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Before the Second Division,

January 10, 1939

No. 40377.

#### Protests 894790-G, etc., of W. *X.*Huber Co. et al. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

It was stipulated that the forks in question are similar to those the subject of *Borgfeldt*v. *United States*(T. D. 48585). The claim at 33J4 percent under paragraph 412 was therefore sustained.
No. 50697.

#### Protest 54380-K of Rhode Island Lace Works, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barry. United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoice 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 the entry. The pro test, was sustained to this extent.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 18, 2021

No. 04-21-00311-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF T.A.G., J.I.R.G., C.M.R.A., AND G.A. JR., minor children,

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020-PA-01608

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal of an order terminating appellant’s parental rights which 

must be disposed of by this court within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed. TEX.

R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2. Appellant’s pro se brief was originally due on November 17, 2021, and 

appellant filed a motion requesting an extension of time until November 19, 2021.

After consideration, we GRANT the motion and ORDER appellant to file her pro se 

brief by November 19, 2021. Appellant is advised that further extensions of time will be 

disfavored.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 18th day of November, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Exhibit 10.16

                                                                         Summary
                                                                         -------




Summary of Loan  Agreement by and between  Shenzhen  BAK Battery  Co.,  Ltd. and
Longgang Branch, Shenzhen Development Bank dated May 27, 2005

Summary of the main contents

>>   Contract number: Shenfa Longgang Dai Zi NO.20050527001.
>>   Loan Principal: RMB 4 million;
>>   Loan term: May 27, 2005 - April 30, 2006;
>>   Interest rate: fixed rate of 6.138%;
     |X|  Penalty interest rate for delayed repayment: 6.138% plus 50% *6.138%;
     |X|  Penalty interest rate for embezzlement of loan proceeds: 6.138% * 2;
>>   Repayment:  interest is payable monthly (20th);  principal is due April 30,
     2006;
>>   Purpose of the loan is to provide working capital for the Company;
>>   Advanced  repayment  of loan needs to be approved by  Development  Bank and
     Development  Bank is entitled to charge one month's  interest  based on the
     prepaid loan principal as penalty;
>>   If any of the following  occurs,  Development Bank is entitled to terminate
     Loan Agreement 3 before its term and withdraw all loans provided and cancel
     all loans not yet provided under Loan Agreement 3:
     |X|  The Company terminates operation or is stopped from operation;
     |X|  The Company  provides  untrue  documents or hide  important  financial
          information about its operation;
     |X|  The Company  intentionally  evades bank debts by way of related  party
          transaction or other means;
     |X|  The Company uses loan proceeds for purposes  other than what is agreed
          without the consent of Development Bank;
     |X|  Occurrence  of other  instances  which  endangers  or may endanger the
          safety of the loan provided by  Development  Bank under Loan Agreement
          3;
>>   Breach  of  contract  penalties:  suspension  of  loan  unprovided,  demand
     prepayment of loan principal and interest  before  maturity;  imposition of
     punitive  interest;  compensation for Development  Bank's expenses incurred
     due to the Company's  breach of contract such as lawyer's fee,  travel cost
     in case of litigation, etc.
>>   Special  terms:  If the Company  belongs to the group client  category,  it
     should  report  to  Development  Bank in  writing  within  10 days from the
     occurrence of any related party transaction  involving more than 10% of the
     Company's net asset.

Terms that have been omitted:  loan arrangement;  interest clearing of the loan;
drawing of the loan;  interest  penalty of loan;  rights and  obligation  of the
borrower;  rights and obligations of the lender;  expenses and service  charges;
settlement  account;   modification  and  termination  of  the  loan  agreement;
miscellaneous;  undertakings and  representations of the lender;  applicable law
and dispute settlement; validity; and attention.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Harold Rafford SANDILANDS, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-50068.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Sept. 13, 2005.

Decided Sept. 22, 2005.

*903Shannon P. Wright, Esq., USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney Criminal Division, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Kenneth M. Stern, Esq., Woodland Hills, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: GRABER and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and FOGEL,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Jeremy D. Fogel, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant Harold Rafford Sandilands appeals from his conviction, after a jury trial, of possession with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, and possession of two unregistered hand grenades. We affirm.

1. The district court did not err in denying Defendant’s motion to suppress evidence seized during the search of his residence. The court’s factual findings are not clearly erroneous. Those findings demonstrate that Officer Espinoza was lawfully responding to a 911 hang-up call that originated from Defendant’s residence and that Defendant voluntarily consented to the search of his residence. A reasonable person would have understood Defendant’s consent to cover any location in the trailer where someone in need of assistance might be. *See United States v. Gutierrez-Mederos,*965 F.2d 800, 803-04 (9th Cir.1992) (noting that a general statement of consent authorizes the officer to search anywhere that could contain the object that the officer asked to look for). Defendant never objected to continuation of the search, which indicated that it was within the scope of the initial consent. *United States v. Cannon,*29 F.3d 472, 477 (9th Cir.1994).

2. The district court did not abuse its discretion, *United States v. Zamora-Hernandez,*222 F.3d 1046, 1049 (9th Cir.2000), in denying Defendant’s motion for a continuance on the eve of trial. The court had granted several continuances already, during which Defendant did not prepare his case diligently, and there is no showing *904that Defendant was prejudiced by the refusal to grant an additional continuance.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
No. 39107.

#### Protest 719077-G of Agua Caliente Jockey Club (San Diego).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

No export declaration was filed covering the horses in ■question. As the requirement of proof of identity under the regulations is mandatory for free entry as American goods returned under paragraph 1615, the protest was overruled.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Scott C. Mahan, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer, certify that:



| | 1. | To my knowledge, this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | To my knowledge, the information contained in this report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of BSQUARE
Corporation.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: March 25, 2010



/s/ Scott C. MahanScott C. MahanVice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
| Ø | Contract      number: Shenfa Longgang Zongzi20081203001; |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------|

| Ø | Maximum      amount of credit facilities to be provided: RMB 150    million; |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Ø | Term:      from December 8, 2008 to December 8,2009. |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------|

| Ø | Purpose      of the loan is to provide working capital for the      Company; |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Ø | Remedies      in the event of breach of contract include adjustment of the credit      amount, suspension of credit, imposition of punitive interest and overdue      interest, an increase of guarantee deposit and the call back of loan      principal and interest beforematurity. |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Ø | The      procedure on using the comprehensive credit  facility |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|

| Ø | The      declaration and promise of thedebtor |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------|

| Ø | Transferring      of the credit facility under the maximumamount |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Ø | Disputation      settlement |
|--------|-----------------------------|

| Ø | Validity |
|--------|----------|

| Ø | Notification |
|--------|--------------|

----
**Exhibit      32**

**CHIEF      EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER      CERTIFICATION***

| 1.   | The                Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 28,                2007, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the“Periodic                Report”), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,                and |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The                information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in                all                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of                the Company. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated:                November 7, 2007 | /s/                  Martin M. Koffel  |
|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                                   | Martin                M. Koffel        |
|                                   | Chief                Executive Officer |
|                                   |                                   |
| Dated:                November 7, 2007 | /s/                  H. Thomas Hicks   |
|                                   | H.                Thomas Hicks         |
|                                   | Chief                Financial Officer |
|                                   |                                   |
**BNP      U.S. FUNDING L.L.C.**

**COMPUTATION      OF NET GAIN PER COMMON SECURITY**

|                                                                    |   |   | **For                the Year Ended December 31, 2006**  |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Net                income                                     |   | $      | 57,603                                                        |   |
| Less:                preferred securities dividend requirement          |   |   | 38,690                                                        |   |
| Net                gain applicable to common securities            |   | $      | 18,913                                                        |   |
|                                                                    |   |   |                                                          |   |
| Securities:                                                             |   |   |                                                          |   |
| Weighted                average number of common securities outstanding |   |   | 53,011                                                        |   |
| Net                gain per common security                             |   | $      | 356.78                                                        |   |

----
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 8, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25966-25967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8725]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[CGD13-07-015]
RIN 1625-AA00


Security Zone: Portland Rose Festival on Willamette River

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of enforcement of Rose Festival Security Zone.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Captain of the Port Portland, Oregon will begin enforcing 
the Portland Rose Festival Security Zone from June 6th, 2007 until June 
11, 2007. This zone provides for the security of public vessels on a 
portion of the Willamette River during the fleet week of the 2007 Rose 
Festival.

DATES: This notice of enforcement for 33 CFR 165.1312 will be enforced 
from 12:01 a.m., June 6, 2007 until 11:59 p.m., June 11, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Petty Officer Michelle Duty , c/o 
Captain of the Port Portland, OR, 6767 North Basin Avenue, Portland, OR 
97217 at (503) 240-9301 to obtain information concerning enforcement of 
this rule.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 29, 2003, the Coast Guard published a 
final rule (68 FR 31979 as amended by 70 FR 33352 published on June 8, 
2005) establishing a security zone, in 33 CFR 165.1312, for the 
security of public

[[Page 25967]]

vessels on a portion of the Willamette River during the fleet week of 
the Rose Festival. This security zone provides for the regulation of 
vessel traffic in the vicinity of the moored vessels. Entry into this 
zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or his 
designee. The Captain of the Port Portland will begin enforcing the 
Rose Festival Security Zone established by 33 CFR 165.1312 on June 6, 
2007. The Captain of the Port may be assisted by other Federal, State, 
or local agencies in enforcing this security zone. This security zone 
will be enforced until June 11, 2007.

    Dated: April 20, 2007.
Patrick G. Gerrity,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Portland.
[FR Doc. E7-8725 Filed 5-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.3


                       Report of Independent Accountants


To the Board of Directors of
Chase Manhattan Bank USA, N.A.

We have examined management's assertion, included in the accompanying Management
Report on Internal Control Over Servicing of Securitized Automobile Financing
Receivables that the Chase Manhattan Bank USA, N.A. maintained effective
internal control over servicing of securitized automobile financing receivables
as of December 31, 2001, based upon the criteria for effective internal control
established in "Internal Control - Integrated Framework" issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Management is
responsible for maintaining effective internal control over such functions. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion based on our
examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with attestation standards established by
the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly,
included obtaining an understanding of internal control over servicing of the
securitized automobile financing receivables, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Because of inherent limitations in any internal control, misstatement due to
error or fraud may occur and not be detected. Also, projections of any
evaluation of internal control over servicing of the securitized automobile
financing receivables to future periods are subject to the risk that internal
control may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the
degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, management's assertion that, the Chase Manhattan Bank USA, N.A.
maintained effective internal control over servicing of securitized automobile
financing receivables as of December 31, 2001, is fairly stated, in all material
respects, based upon the criteria for effective internal control established in
"Internal Control - Integrated Framework" issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
---------------------------------------
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

March 25, 2002
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 243 

Supporting the efforts of the Iraq Neighbors Process Ministerial meeting 

and encouraging the ongoing engagement of the international community 

to stabilize Iraq and achieve peace in the Middle East. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 29, 2007 

Mr. BOYD of Florida (for himself, Mr. GILCHREST, Mr. COHEN, Ms. SUTTON, 

and Mr. WICKER) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which 

was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Supporting the efforts of the Iraq Neighbors Process Ministerial meeting and encouraging the ongoing engagement 

of the international community to stabilize Iraq and 

achieve peace in the Middle East. 

Whereas, on November 2–3, 2007, the Iraq Neighbors Process Ministerial meeting will convene for its second meeting in Istanbul, Turkey, involving ministers from countries in the Middle East, as well as the United States, 

the European Union, and the United Nations; 

Whereas the United States enjoys important friendships with 

its allies in the Middle East; 


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
2 

•HCON 243 IH 

Whereas fostering stability in Iraq and in the Middle East as 

a whole is a shared priority for the United States and its 

allies around the world; and 

Whereas increased dialogue is a critical step in improving relations between Iraq and its neighboring countries: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That Congress supports and commends the 

3 efforts of the Iraq Neighbors Process Ministerial meeting 

4 and encourages ongoing cooperation and dialogue to foster 

5 stability in Iraq and achieve peace in the Middle East. 

Æ 


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS