alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Before the First Division,

January 27, 1941

No. 45297.

#### Protest 957918-G of W. X. Huber Co. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was found that the merchandise is a refuse thrown off or dropped from the machine in a manufacturing process. On the authority of *Willits*v. *United States*(11 C. C. P. A. 499, T. D. 39657), *Harley*v. *United States*(14 id. 112, T. D. 41644), *Masson*v. *United States*(15 id. 78, T. D. 42157), *Eastman Kodak Co.*v. *United States*(26 id. 315, C. A. D. 34), and Abstract 41389 the claim as waste at 10 percent under paragraph 1555 was sustained. Abstract 15381 (T. D. 28160) distinguished.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATE OF CEO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. §1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of Network 1 Financial Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Damon Testaverde, Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) hereby 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 as of and for the period covered by the Report.





Date: October 13, 2011
/s/ Damon TestaverdeDamon TestaverdeChief Executive Officer
#### Vonsher ADAMS, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA PAROLE COMMISSION, Respondent.

No. 99-0948.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 7, 1999.

Vonsher Adams, pro se, petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

We conclude that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus without affording petitioner the opportunity to reply to respondent’s response below. *See Jones v. Singletary,*709 So.2d 656 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); *Bard v. Wolson,*687 So.2d 254 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Accordingly, the trial court’s order denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus is quashed and the matter is remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

JOANOS, KAHN and PADOVANO, JJ„ concur.
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

April 8, 2005

Mr. David Christopher Newell

Fort Bend Co. Asst. Dist. Atty.

301 Jackson Street, Suite 101

Richmond, TX 77469

Mr. Stephen A. Doggett

201 South  11th Street

Richmond, TX 77469

Mr. John F. Healey Jr.

District Attorney

Fort Bend County Courthouse

301 Jackson, Room 101

Richmond, TX 77469

Pat  King

CASA

1505 Liberty Street 

Richmond, TX 77469

RE:Case Number:  04-0307

Court of Appeals Number:  13-02-00044-CV

Trial Court Number:  7A

Style:IN THE INTEREST OF J.L., A CHILD

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas delivered the enclosed opinion and judgment in the above-referenced cause.  

Sincerely,

Andrew Weber, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosures

**Case No. 04-0307Page 1**
Proxy


Proxy




We, 




Wang Shubin: a citizen of the People’s Republic of China (ID No.: 220622196506270630), a shareholder of Dalian Vitup Healthcare Management Co. Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “Dalian Vitup”), holding 51% of the shares of the company,




Feng Gu: a citizen of the People’s Republic of China (ID No.: 220602196409190940), a shareholder of Dalian Vitup, holding 49% of the shares of the company,




the undersigned,




do hereby assign all our shares to Dalian Vitup Management Holdings Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “Dalian Vitup Holdings”) and confer full power of attorney, irrevocably, on the abovementioned corporation as true and lawful attorney-in-fact for me and in my name, place, and stead, and on my behalf, and for my use and benefit regarding the relevant legal affairs relating to the abovementioned assignment as follows.




1.

To constitute and appoint any person whom Dalian Vitup Holdings believes to be right one as our true and lawful attorney and agent for us and in my name, place and stead, to vote as our proxy at the Meeting of the Shareholders of the said corporation in accordance with the laws of the People’s Republic of China and the articles of association of the said company, including but not limit to sell or assign all of our shares of Dalian Vitup or any portion thereof, vote as our agent the material events in the shareholder’s meeting of Dalian Vitup and elect and appoint the directors and senior management of Dalian Vitup. We will issue proxies to the persons appointed by Dalian Vitup Holdings from time to time to the effect of the exercise of voting rights by our proxy.

2.

If Dalian Vitup Holdings appoints us to attend the Meeting of the Shareholders, we hereby promise to exercise our voting rights in accordance with the instructions of the said corporation.













This Proxy shall be effective from the date of the execution of this Proxy to the date of the completion of the assignment hereinunder.
























Wang Shubin







Signature:________   ____________

     /s/ Shubin Wang




Date:                                    













Gu Feng










Signature _____________   _______

     /s/ Feng Gu










Date:
Order entered November 3, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00681-CV

FRITZ MANAGEMENT, LLC, Appellant

V.

HUGE AMERICAN REAL ESTATE, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-14-00657-D

ORDER

We GRANT appellant’s October 30, 2014 motion to extend time to file reply brief and 

ORDER the brief be filed no later than November 12, 2014. No further extensions will be 

granted absent exigent circumstances. 

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Steven Evans, Appellant.

[699 NYS2d 351]

—Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J., at suppression hearing; Martin Marcus, J., at plea and sentence), rendered December 23, 1997, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts) and attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 6 years to life, concurrent with consecutive terms of 2 to 4 years, 3 years and 2 years, unanimously affirmed.

*15Defendant’s suppression motion was properly denied. We see no reason to disturb the court’s credibility determinations, which are supported by the record. The protective sweep of the apartment by the police was justified because there were specific, articulable facts to justify a reasonable belief by the police that other persons might be present in the apartment who could pose a threat to safety, or destroy evidence (see, *People v Febus,*157 AD2d 380, *appeal dismissed*77 NY2d 835), in that defendant threw a pistol into the apartment, and the police had reason to believe that the apartment was the residence of someone other than defendant.

The consecutive sentences were lawfully imposed, and we perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Williams, Wallach, Lerner and Saxe, JJ.
Exhibit
      23.1


**Windes
        & McClaughry Accountancy Corporation**
 
 
 
 
 **CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
 
 We
        hereby
        consent to the inclusion in the Annual Report of Seychelle Environmental
        Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-KSB/A of our report dated April 12, 2006, on
        the
        audited financial statements of Seychelle Environmental Technologies Inc.,
        as of
        February 28, 2006 and for the year then ended.
 
 
 /s/
        Windes & McClaughry
 Irvine,
        California
 February
        23 2007
 
 18201
        Von
        Karman Ave. Suite 1060, Irvine, CA 92612
 Tele:
        (949) 271-2600        Fax:
        (949) 660-5681
# C_2015127EN.01000201.xml

| 20.4.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 127/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 127/2

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 12 February 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Lb Group Ltd v Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze, Amministrazione Autonoma dei Monopoli di Stato (AAMS), Galassia Game Srl

(Case C-651/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure - Identical questions referred - Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Games of chance - National legislation - Reorganisation of the licencing system through an alignment of licence expiry dates - New call for tenders - Licences with a shorter period than that of licences awarded in the past - Restriction - Overriding reasons of general interest - Proportionality))

(2015/C 127/02)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Lb Group Ltd

Applicant:

Defendants: Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze, Amministrazione Autonoma dei Monopoli di Stato (AAMS), Galassia Game Srl

Defendants:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

Articles 49 TFEU and 56 TFEU and the principles of equal treatment and effectiveness must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that in issue in the main proceedings, which provides for the organisation of a new call for tenders relating to licences with a period of validity shorter than that of licences awarded in the past due to a reorganisation of the licencing system through an alignment of licence expiry dates.

---

(1)  OJ C 112, 14.4.2014.

1

---
# C_2015311EN.01000501.xml

| 21.9.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 311/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 311/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2015 — ClientEarth, Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) v European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), European Commission

(Case C-615/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Access to documents of the institutions of the European Union - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Article 4(1)(b) - Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 - Article 8 - Exception to right of access - Protection of personal data - Concept of ‘Personal data’ - Conditions for transfer of personal data - Names of authors of each comment on European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) draft guidance relating to scientific documents to be included in applications for authorisation to place plant protection products on the market - Refusal of access))

(2015/C 311/05)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellants: ClientEarth, Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) (represented by: P. Kirch, lawyer)

Appellants:

Other parties to the proceedings: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (represented by: D. Detken and C. Pintado, acting as Agents), European Commission (represented by B. Martenczuk and L. Pignataro-Nolin, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Intervener in support of the defendants: European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) (represented by A. Buchta and M. Pérez Asinari, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendants:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in ClientEarth and PAN Europe v EFSA (T-214/11, EU:T:2013:483); |
| --- | --- |

1)

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union in ClientEarth and PAN Europe v EFSA (T-214/11, EU:T:2013:483);

| 2) | Annuls the decision of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of 12 December 2011; |
| --- | --- |

2)

Annuls the decision of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of 12 December 2011;

| 3) | Orders the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by ClientEarth and Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) in the appeal and in the proceedings at first instance; |
| --- | --- |

3)

Orders the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by ClientEarth and Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) in the appeal and in the proceedings at first instance;

| 4) | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs relating to the appeal and the proceedings at first instance; |
| --- | --- |

4)

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs relating to the appeal and the proceedings at first instance;

| 5) | Orders the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) to bear its own costs relating to the appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

5)

Orders the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) to bear its own costs relating to the appeal proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 71, 8.3.2014.

1

---
**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 **

|  | (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 result of operations of the                Company. |
|--|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    |   | /s/ Jose                  Araque                                         |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |
|   |   | Jose                    Araque President,                    Principal Financial Officer, Principal                    Accounting Officer, Chairman                    of the Board of                    Directors                                                                   |

----
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-153229, 333-116837 and 333-175230 on Form S-8 and Nos. 333-126312, 333-126573, 333-127464 and 333-172441 on Form S-3 of our reports dated February 23, 2012, relating to the consolidated financialstatements and financial statement schedule of Strategic Hotels & Resorts, Inc. and the effectiveness of Strategic Hotels & Resorts, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Strategic Hotels & Resorts, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2011. 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

Chicago, Illinois 

February 27, 2012
Exhibit 23.2


                               [KPMG LETTERHEAD]


                         Independent Auditors' Consent


The Board of Directors
SmarTire Systems Inc.:

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  registration  statements
(Nos. 333-107904,  333-107903, 333-93021, 333-67751, 333-80923 and 333-55810) on
Form S-8 of SmarTire  Systems Inc. of our report dated September 10, 2004 except
for note 16 which is as of  October 5, 2004,  with  respect to the  consolidated
balance  sheets of SmarTire  Systems Inc. as of July 31, 2004 and 2003,  and the
related  consolidated   statements  of  operations,   stockholders'  equity  and
comprehensive  income  (loss)  and  cash  flows  for  each of the  years  in the
three-year  period  ended July 31, 2004,  which  report  appears in the July 31,
2004,  annual  report on Form 10-KSB of SmarTire  Systems  Inc. Our report dated
September  10,  2004,  except for Note 16 which is of October 5, 2004,  includes
additional comments for U.S. readers on Canada - U.S. reporting differences that
states that the financial  statements are affected by conditions and events that
cast substantial  doubt on the Company's ability to continue as a going concern.
The financial  statements do not include any adjustments  that might result from
the outcome of that uncertainty.


KPMG LLP [signed]

Chartered Accountants

Vancouver, Canada
October 29, 2004
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14

UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED

(SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)



I, Donald B. Cohen, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of The Quantum Group, Inc. for the quarter ended July 31, 2007;



2.

Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 quarterly report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual 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 annual report;



4.

The registrant's other certifying officers 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 quarterly report is being prepared;



b)

evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls 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 controls over financial reporting; and



5.

The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the 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 controls 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 controls over financial reporting.





Date: September 19, 2007



/s/Donald B. Cohen

Donald B. Cohen

Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 22, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 28678]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9826]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology


Notice of Prospective Grant of Exclusive Patent License

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Commerce.

SUMMARY: This is a notice in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 
CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i) that the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (``NIST''), U.S. Department of Commerce, is contemplating 
the grant of an exclusive license in the United States of America, its 
territories, possessions and commonwealths, to NIST's interest in the 
invention embodied in U.S. Patent No. 5,620,857 (Application No. 08/
473,979), titled ``Optical Trap for Detection and Quantitation of 
Subzeptomolar Quantities of Analytes,'' NIST Docket No. 94-042US to 
Haemonetics Corporation, having a place of business at 400 Wood Road, 
Braintree, Massachusetts 02184-9114. The grant of the license would be 
for the field of use: Chemical and biological material sensing and 
measurement for medical diagnostics.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. Terry Lynch, National Institute of 
Standards and Technology, Office of Technology Partnerships, 100 Bureau 
Drive, Stop 2200, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, Phone 301-975-2691.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The prospective exclusive license will be 
royalty bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 
U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be 
granted unless, within thirty days from the date of this published 
Notice, NIST receives written evidence and argument which establish 
that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the 
requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The availability of the 
invention for licensing was published in the Federal Register on June 
24, 2003.
    U.S. Patent No. 5,620,857 is owned by the U.S. government, as 
represented by the Secretary of Commerce. Tightly focused beams of 
laser light are used as ``optical tweezers'' to trap and manipulate 
polarizable objects such as microspheres of glass or latex with 
diameters on the order of 4.5 .mu.m. When analytes are allowed to 
adhere to the microspheres, small quantities of these analytes can be 
manipulated, thus allowing their detection and quantitation even when 
amounts and concentrations of the analytes are extremely small. 
Illustrative examples include measuring the strength needed to break 
antibody-antigen bonds and the detection of DNA sequences.

    Dated: May 16, 2007.
James M. Turner,
Deputy Director.
[FR Doc. E7-9826 Filed 5-21-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-P