alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 

Bon. compton Mite county hditcr ?reestone county ?alrf Iold, Texas

Dsar sir:

You have submitteda c the oaptlonedquestion,vhlah ar set forth la your letter of

of 7, in B **is** vas **during the**  011 lty had so msny thelav, that the

been neglectedas to being empt or any othervay. It has property1 on the State and County es assessedagainst it. The Xorthm 01 Dlstrlothas no tax charge against it." loving statutoryand constltutlonalprovlslons
Constitution,Art. 8, sea. I: 'All property in this State,vhether ovned by natural persons **or** corporations,other than munlolpal, shall be taxed in proportion to lta value,vhioh shall be asoertalned as lpay

be providedby lav."lion. Compton White, page 2 Conrtltutlon,

Art. 11, SW. 9: "The **property** of oountles, oltles and towns, **wned and**  hold only for pub110 purpo1c8, . . . and all other property drvokd 8xoluslval~to the use a&

publlo 8hall bs 

### l

xmpt iron

. . .
, . *
. ~onstltutloa,

Art. e, sec. 21

. the leglrlaturruby, **br** general laws, exempt from $x&m pub110property used for publlo purposes;

. . . Art. 7150, B. c. s.: Wie fcJlov:ng

prcparty shall be exempt from taxation, tovita , . . "All property, vhsther real or personal,belongIng exclusivelyto this State, or say political subdlvlslon thereof. * The oourt **in** the oa8e of City of Abllew v. State, 113 8. Y. (26)631 (vrlt**of error**  **di8mi8SOd) bfter**  **dl8ou8fsin&** the **proper** oonstruotionto be given the above ooastitutlonaland statutoryprovl8iossin wder to have harmony among them, ruled a0 **fO11OV8 I** 

**“ The8e**  OOn8lderatlon8lead us t0 the **00nOh8iOn that**  a8 to tla pier of thho LeELslaturs,to exempt publics property from taxation, all suoh property should be regarded as 'ubeil

fcr yslb'lc

**3Ul7DSSS ’**  vhen it 1s ovned and held for pub110purpose8,but not **ovned** or held sxoluslvel~ for such yposes; and there has been no abandonment of 8uoh purporer. The **property** under oonslderatlonIn thlr OplnlOnvan purohased tor a pibllo jwpse. The query thus arirres whether or **not** there has been an abaadonmsntof 8uoh purposes.

**In** anaver to our letter in vhlab **vo requested**  y8u w infOrn us as to the **iaanner** io **Vhdh** thl8 propertyha8 been **USS~** slnoe 1924, pru advisedus U **f0llOVS:**

the only ua8 they have been put to rime then (19~4i*i;ior pneral pubilc use, parkingand 8torlw oounty road rqulpment on.*Hon. CoaptonUhlto, page 3

Yo are of ths oplnlon **them** ha8 been no abandonment ot using thi8 property ror publlo purpom~r. The faot that it 18 king **U86d for**  **a dlfferont**  publlo purposs than **originally** lntmded 18 ln our opinion lmnaterial. Wo **ther6for*** **snav6r** your quostlon in th6 afflrmatlte.

**Robert 0.**  **Kooh AIliStaat**
[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:****San Juan Islands NationalMonument draft resource management plan and environmental impact statement**
 
SuDoc Number:I 53.59/2:SA 5 J/DRAFT

Item Number:0629-E-10 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001084214
 
Report | Appendices | All Individual Files(zip)
 
June 10, 2020
No. 48151.

#### Protests 18185-K, etc., of Wm. Shaland (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The electric Christmas wreaths in question, stipulated to be similar to those the subject of *United States*v. *Minami*(29 C. C. P. A. 169, C. A. D. 188), were held dutiable at 35 percent under paragraph 353 as articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device, such as signs. Protests sustained to this extent.
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 quarterly report of The Quantum Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Noel J. Guillama, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify to my knowledge and in my capacity as an officer of the Company, 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, 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 as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.



Date: September 21, 2009



| |                                                                    
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Noel J. Guillama                                               
| | Noel J. Guillama                                                   
| | President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)



A certification furnished pursuant to this Item will not be deemed filed for purposes of section 18 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78r), or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the smaller reporting company specifically incorporates it by reference.
**Exhibit
      10.8**






**COLLATERAL
      AGENT AGREEMENT**








The
      undersigned, Gary W. Pollack, Esq.,
      personal attorney for Roy Sciacca will act as collateral agent in regards to
      the
      items on Exhibit “B” to the February 22, Beach Boys Memorabilia Purchase
      Agreement entered into between Roy Sciacca and Focus.





1.  The
      undersigned shall be
      the only key holder and the items will be held under the undersigned’s exclusive
      control, subject to the undersigned’s priority lien.





2.   The
      Exhibit “B”
memorabilia collections shall be stored at “the Fortress in downtown Miami,
      Florida.





3.  The
      undersigned shall be
      reimbursed for the past storage of the collection in the warehouse located
      at
      12701 S.W. 124 Street, where it has been stored since the dispute with the
      Beach
      Boys began and shall be reimbursed for the storage at the Fortress, prior to
      its
      discharge.





4.   The
      designated
      agent for Focus is Baruch Halpern, 18851 N.E. 29 Avenue, Suite 500, Aventura,
      Florida 33180, (786) 528-1400, who is acknowledged by collateral agent and
      who
      further agrees that Baruch Halpern  shall receive notice by overnight
      mail  as agent for lenders, so that a corporate officer of Global
      Realty Development Corporation  may be present upon removal of said
      item from the Beach Boys Memorabilia collection.  Should any item in
      the collection be placed for sale or auction Baruch Halpern shall further
      receive notice of the transfer of any proceeds from individual item’s sales to
      the undersigned’s Florida Bar trust account.





5.  The
      collateral agent
      shall control access to the collateral so that access may only be had under
      his
      supervision or recorded by collateral agent or his representatives.





6.  The
      undersigned’s law
      offices are located at One Southeast Third Avenue, Suite 1260, Miami, Florida
      33131, (305) 373-9676.





Dated
      this ____ day of July,
      2007.





_______________________________


Gary
      W. Pollack
### Ground-water resources of the lower Yellowstone River valley between Miles City and Glendive, Montana, with a section on the chemical quality of the water

By: Alfred E. TorreyFrank Albert SwensonHerbert A. Swenson

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/cir93

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
EXHIBIT 31.2
                                                                    ------------

                        SECTION 302 CERTIFICATion OF CFO

I, James Ross, Chief Financial Officer of Medinex Systems, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-KSB of Medinex Systems, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial  condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officer(s)  and I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

         a) Designed such  disclosure  controls and  procedures,  or caused such
disclosure  controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to
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;
and

5. The registrant's other certifying  officer(s) and I have disclosed,  based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,  to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

         a) All significant  deficiencies and material  weaknesses in the design
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.


/s/ James Ross
--------------
James Ross
Chief Financial Officer

March 11, 2004
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLANewsNews Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# DLA Disposition Services equipment to the rescue

By Jeff LandenbergerDLA Disposition Services

                San Carlos Park, Florida  –              

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
(Reap. Dec. 9630)

#### W. R. Zanes & Company *v.*United States

Entry No. 724-H.

(Decided March 11, 1960)

*Sharreits, Paley & Carter (Howard Clare Carter*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Dowh,*Assistant Attorney General *(Murray SMaroff,*trial attorney), for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

The merchandise involved in this appeal for re-appraisement consists of a stroke shaping machine and equipment, imported from England on or about July 25, 1958. It was entered at the unit invoice prices, less 27% percent trade discount, plus packing. It was appraised in British currency at the following amounts, less 12% per centum, plus packing:

> Stroke shaping machine_£332-0-0

> Electrical equipment_ 31-0-0

> Swivel table_ 14-0-0

When the case was called for trial, it was stipulated by and between counsel for the respective parties that the value or price at the time *608of exportation of the merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of England, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, including the electrical equipment and accessories, was 332 pounds sterling, plus 14 pounds, less 12% per centum, plus packing, as shown on the invoice, and that there was no higher export value.

On the agreed facts, I find that foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the machine involved herein, including the electrical equipment and accessories, and that such value is 332 pounds sterling, plus 14 pounds, less 12% per centum, plus packing, as shown on the invoice.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 76-5693.

#### Morita *v.*Southern California Permanente Medical Group.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6909

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

MARVIN W. LEWIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CR-93-28, CA-97-949-H-5)

Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 20, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

C. Winston Gilchrist, Lillington, North Carolina, for Appellant.

Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh,

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Marvin A. Lewis seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.

1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Lewis, Nos. CR-93-28; CA-97-949-H-5

(E.D.N.C. May 19, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
No. 45247.

#### Protests 967240-G, etc., of Gimbel Bros., Inc., et al. (Philadelphia, etc.).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 14

- 443C

(Bid Protest)

(Filed: August 18 , 2014)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

ARC ASPICIO, LLC.,

Plaintiff, *

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

* v.

THE UNITED STATES,

Defendant,

TERACORE INC.,

Defendant

- Intervenor.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

_________________________________________________________

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

_________________________________________________________

On May 28, 2014, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss relating that it has withdrawn the

Federal Emergency Management Agency’s override of the Competition in Contracting Act

(“CICA”) stay and has issued a stop work order to the awardee

. As such, Defendant contends

that the protest is moot. Plaintiff informed the Court that it does not oppose Defendant’s motion.

T his Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject

- matter

jurisdiction and directs the Clerk of Court to DISMISS this protest

.

s/Mary Ellen Coster Williams

MARY ELLEN COSTER WILLIAMS

Judge
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the quarterly report of The McClatchy
Company (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 28, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Patrick J. Talamantes, certify, 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: March 2, 2009 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    PATRICK J.
TALAMANTES
|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                              |  | Patrick J. Talamantes Chief Financial Officer
(Reap. Dec. 9011)

Entry No. 820850, etc.

#### Walter L. Stern & Co. et al. *v.*United States

(Decided October 22, 1957)

*Brooks & Brooks*for the plaintiffs.

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

WilsoN, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the Appeals for Reappraisement enumerated on schedule “A,” attached hereto and made part hereof, consists of wool piece goods imported from Holland and that the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was $2.35 per yard, less the percentage allowances shown on said schedule *“A”*for the respective items and that there was no higher foreign value for such or similar merchandise.

> This stipulation is limited to the items shown on the attached schedule *“A”*and the appeals are abandoned as to all merchandise not mentioned.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that these cases are hereby submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for *680the determination of the value of the merchandise enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, and that such value was $2.35 per yard, less the percentage allowances shown on said schedule *“A”*for the respective items.

The appeals having been abandoned insofar as they relate to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeals are dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.