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

April 24, 1943

No. 48225.

#### Protest 76356-K of Pan Pacific Importers, Ltd. (Los Angeles).

Walker, Judge:

The merchandise the subject of this protest was classified by the collector of customs as baskets composed wholly or in chief value of bamboo and duty was assessed thereon at the rate of 50 percent ad valorem under the provision therefor in paragraph 411, Tariff Act of 1930. The protest claim is that the articles are entitled to classification under paragraph 1537 (a) of the same act, which reads as follows:

> Par. 1537. (a) Manufactures of bone, chip, grass, sea grass, horn, quills, palm leaf, straw, weeds, or whalebone, or of which these substancés or any of them is the component material of chief value, not specially provided for, 25 per centum ad valorem; manufactures of chip roping, 25 per centum ad valorem. The terms “grass” and “straw" mean these substances in their natural state and not the separated fibers thereof.

The theory upon which the plaintiff’s claim was based was that the merchandise consisted of trays as distinguished from baskets, and that they were composed in chief value of one of the substances enumerated in paragraph 1537 (a), *supra.*

At the trial of the issue samples of the merchandise involved were offered and received in evidence as collective exhibit 1. The single witness called to the stand by the plaintiff, who was connected with the importing concern, testified that in his experience articles such as those in issue are sold and billed as trays as distinguished from baskets. However, upon being asked to state the component material of chief value in collective exhibit 1, Ije stated that it was bamboo. .

As bamboo is not one of the substances enumerated in paragraph 1537 (a), *supra,*under which claim was made in the protest, counsel for the plaintiff admitted in the brief filed in its behalf that “plaintiff has failed to present a proper claim.” It is urged, however, that notwithstanding the fact that the court cannot therefore grant relief to the plaintiff, the court should consider the question of whether the articles in issue are in fact baskets, and, presumably, announce its conclusion thereon.

In the brief filed on behalf of the defendant, such action on the part of the court is vigorously opposed, it being contended that the question of whether or not the collector’s classification of the merchandise as baskets was correct became moot upon the admission of failure on the part of the plaintiff to present a proper claim.

Our view coincides with that of counsel for the defendant. While it is true that an opinion as to the correctness of the classification of the articles at bar might be of some assistance to litigants in the conduct of future cases on the same subject, nevertheless it is not the duty of this court to decide questions which cannot affect the result of the controversy before it. See *C. J. Tower & Sons et al.*v. *United States,*20 C. C. P. A. 364, T. D. 46131, and cases therein cited.

On the record presented, the protest is therefore overruled, and judgment will issue accordingly.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 134049 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 134049 COA: 273929 Monroe CC: 04-033815-FC MARC PAUL SANDERS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 4, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, purs uant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we RE MAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted.

d1119 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
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

# Davis makes the grade, earns Hall of Fame induction

By Dianne Ryder

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

R&DEBSDavisawardsHall of FameHOFresearchDonna DavisEnterprise Business SystemJ3Logistics Operations
September 12, 1940

No. 44326.

Suit 4173.

#### Geo. *S. Bush & Co., Inc.*v. *United States.*

Reap. Dec. 4253 affirmed. C. A. D. 64 reversed 6/21/40 (not j'et reported).
```

Exhibit 32

          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 Nutra Pharma Corp. on Form 10-QSB for
the period ending June 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Rik J. Deitsch, Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

     (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.

/s/ Rik J. Deitsch
Rik J. Deitsch
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
Date: August 27, 2004
```
#### George G. Lippelgoes et al. *v.*United States

No. 6792.

Entry Nos. 742318; 764189.

Invoices dated Manchester, England, February 5, 1946, etc.

Certified February 6, 1946, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., March 4, 1946, etc.

(Decided January 22, 1947)

*Strauss & Hedges (Hadley S. King*of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

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

Kincheloe, Judge:

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

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Exhibit 32

ANSWERTHINK, INC

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 Annual Report of Answerthink, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), we, Ted A. Fernandez, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, and Grant M. Fitzwilliam, Executive Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13 (a) 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Ted A. FernandezTed A. FernandezChairman of the Board and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 15, 2006/s/ Grant M. FitzwilliamGrant M. FitzwilliamExecutive Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial OfficerMarch 15, 2006


A signed original of this statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Answerthink, Inc. and
will be retained by Answerthink, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 65803.

#### A. & P. Import Company *v.*United States,

protest 60/21986 (New York).

Opinion by

Moliison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of valances similar in all material respects to those the subject of *D. N. & E. Walter*& *Co. et al.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 26, C.D. 2098), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 49486.

#### Protests 10248-K, etc., of Adolph Goldmark & Sons et al. (Detroit, etc.).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 54970.

#### Aris Gloves, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 156238-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the Federal Reserve bank certified dual rates of exchange for the currencies involved in the liquidation of the entries for the dates of exportation of the merchandise covered by the entries and that the circumstances relating to the liquidation of the said entries are similar in. all material respects to those in Abstract 54732. In view of this stipulation and following the cited decision it was held that the currencies of the invoices covered by certain enumerated entries should have been converted in the man ner directed by the judgment of this court in said Abstract 54732, in accordance with Bureau of Customs Circular Letter No. 2675, dated October 19, 1949.
GUARANTEE AGREEMENT



This Agreement dated this 10th day of October 1997, between Marquise Building

and Management Company, hereinafter referred to as "Guarantor" and Cooperative

Images, Inc. and Elective Investments, Inc., hereinafter referred to as

"Borrower",

The parties agree to these terms and conditions:

1.  Guarantor will use it's designee, Gerard Armond Powell, to personally
guarantee debts of the Borrower. Those debts of the Borrower will be limited
specifically to a transaction with Boyle Leasing Technologies.

2. In exchange for Guarantor's designee signing a personal guarantee, the
Guarantor will receive a 1 % guarantee fee on all individual loans that
originated by the Borrower that are hypothecated on the LeaseComm/Boyle
Leasing Technologies credit facility.

3. This Agreement is the total of the agreements between the parties relating
to the above mentioned guarantee.

4. The term of this Agreement will be for as long as Guarantor and/or his
designee are asked to guarantee obligations by the Borrower.

5. This Agreement is construed under the Laws of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.


Marquise Building and Management          Cooperative Images, Inc/
 Company                                  Elective Investment, Inc.
GUARANTOR                                 BORROWER
/s/ Gerard A Powell                       /s/ Vincent Trapass
# C_2012319EN.01001501.xml

| 20.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 319/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 319/15

---

Action brought on 4 September 2012 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-387/12)

2012/C 319/28

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: S. Fiorentino, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the European Commission implementing decision 2012/336/EU of 22 June 2012 (notified under document C(2012) 3838), excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), in so far as that decision is the object of the present action; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the European Commission implementing decision 2012/336/EU of 22 June 2012 (notified under document C(2012) 3838), excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), in so far as that decision is the object of the present action;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The scope of the present action is limited to the flat-rate financial corrections applied to the Italian Republic in relation to the aid scheme for growers of processing tomatoes, for the years 2006, 2007 and 2008.

In support of its action, the applicant relies on a single plea alleging infringement of Article 7(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1258/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (OJ 1999 L 160, p. 103) and of Article 31 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (2005 L 209, p. 1).

By that plea, the applicant challenges the application of the financial corrections made by the contested decision, equal to 2 % of expenditure, submitting that those corrections were applied notwithstanding the proof, acknowledged by the Commission, that no significant financial damage was caused.

In addition, the applicant disputes the quantification of the corrections themselves in so far as their actual determination is disproportionate and manifestly illogical, since they are considerably higher than the potential damage resulting from the conduct attributed to the Italian authorities.

---
# C_2014329EN.01002503.xml

| 22.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/25

---

Order of the General Court of 16 July 2014 — Marouf v Council

(Case T-569/12) (1)

1

2014/C 329/38

Language of the case: English

The President of the Ninth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.

1

---
___________________________

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Millennium Capital Venture Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "Report"), I, Mario Drolet, President, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date: December 19, 2003 | By:/s/ Mario Drolet
Name:	Mario DroletTitle: 	President (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
|----------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# C_2014102EN.01003601.xml

| 7.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 102/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 102/36

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 February 2014 — Advance Magazine Publishers v OHIM — Nanso Group (TEEN VOGUE)

(Case T-509/12) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark TEEN VOGUE - Earlier national word mark VOGUE - Admissibility - Formulation of the form of order sought - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Identity or similarity of the goods - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Partial refusal to register))

2014/C 102/56

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc. (New York, New York, United States of America) (represented by C. Aikens, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by V. Melgar, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Nanso Group Oy (Nokia, Finland) (represented by M. Tuominen, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 September 2012 (case R 147/2011-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Nanso Group Oy and Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc., to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Advance Magazine Publishers, Inc., to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.

1

---
Form of Supply Agreement



 Exhibit 10.II.B 
 

 
 SUPPLY AGREEMENT 
 FEED GRADE PHOSPHATES (MONOCAL) 
 VENEZUELA 
  

			
	DATE:	  	September 11, 2007
		
	SELLER:	  	 MOSAIC FERTILIZER LLC, d.b.a.
 MOSAIC FEED
INGREDIENTS
 8813 HWY 41 SOUTH
 RIVERVIEW, FL
33569

		
	BUYER:	  	 CARGILL, INCORPORATED
 c/o CARGILL DE
VENEZUELA
 EDIFICIO PARQUE CRISTAL TORRE OESTE
 PISO 8, AV. FRANCISCO DE MIRANDA
 CARACAS, VEN 1060

		
	PRODUCT:	  	BIOFOS
		
	SPECIFICATIONS:	  	TYPICAL MOSAIC SPECIFICATIONS
		
	MARKET:	  	VENEZUELA
		
	PERIOD:	  	September 1, 2007 THROUGH September 1, 2008
		
	PRICING:	  	TO BE NEGOTIATED AT TIME OF PURCHASE
		
	QUANTITY:	  	TO BE NEGOTIATED AT TIME OF PURCHASE
		
	DELIVERY:	  	TO BE NEGOTIATED AT TIME OF PURCHASE
		
	PAYMENT:	  	TYPICALLY 60 DAYS
		
	TERMS:	  	MOSAIC TERMS AND CONDITIONS TO APPLY. (ATTACHED)

  

									
	 CARGILL, INCORPORATED
	 		 	MOSAIC FERTILIZER, LLC
					
	By:	 	  
	 		 	By:	 	  

	Name:	 	  
	 		 	Name:	 	  

	Its:	 	  
	 		 	Its:
### King County Dow Constantine King County Executive 401 Fifth Avenue, Suite 800 Seattle, WA 98104-1818 206-263-9600 Fax 206-296-0194 TrY Relay: 711 www.kingcounty.gov May 14,2015
The Honorable Anthony R. Foxx Secretary ofTransportation U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Ave SE Washington, DC 20590 The Honorable Penny Pritzker U.S. Department ofCommerce 1401 Constitution Ave. NW Washington, D.C. 20230 Dear Secretaries Foxx, Kerry and Pritzker: The Honorable John F. Kerry Secretary ofState U.S. Department ofState 2201 C StreetNW Washington, DC 20520 ·

A recent white paper commissioned bythe Partnership for Open & Fair Skies found that, over the last 10 years, Qatar Airways, Etihad Airways, and Emirates Airline have received at least $42 billion in government subsidies and other unfair benefits in violation ofOpen Skies policy. U.S. Open Skies policy is predicated on a level playing field. The subsides such as interest free loans, equity infusions,

**~nd** passenger fee exemptions, to name a few, undermine fair competition and will result in a significant shift in market share to the Gulfcarriers' advantage. Rather than fuel economic activity and growth, the routes that Gulfcarriers operate to the U.S. have not meaningfully increased passenger traffic. This threatens the U.S. airline industry, highpaying aviationjobs, and communities throughout the United States. Itis estimated that every flight lost or forgone by a U.S. carrier because ofGulfsubsides will result in a net loss ofmore than 800 U.S.jobs. I urge the U.S. government to request consultations about Gulfairline subsidization through the existing Open Skies agreements to ensure fair and equal competition. The U.S. government should also immediately freeze the introduction ofnewpassenger service by the Gulfcarriers during these consultations.

King County is an Equal Opportunity/AffirmativeAction Employer and complies with theAmericans with DisabilititesActSecretaries Foxx, Kerry, and Pritzker May 14,2015 Page2
This isn'tjust about

**fairness~** Itis about maintaining the economic prosperity ofour U.S. airlines, businesses, and communities. I appreciate your attention to this matter. Sincerely,

Dow Constantine King County Executive
# C_2014194EN.01002201.xml

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/22

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 May 2014 — Simca Europe v OHIM — PSA Peugeot Citroën (Simca)

(Case T-327/12) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark Simca - Bad faith - Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2014/C 194/28

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Simca Europe Ltd (Birmingham, United Kingdom) (represented by: N. Haberkamm, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Schifko, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: GIE PSA Peugeot Citroën (Paris, France) (represented by: P. Kotsch, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 April 2012 (Case R 645/2011-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between GIE PSA Peugeot Citroën and Simca Europe Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action;

| 2) | Orders Simca Europe Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders Simca Europe Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 287, 22.9.2012.

1

---
No. 42109.

#### Protests 820772-G, etc., of A. Alonge & Bro. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

On the authority of Abstract 40880 the protests were sustained.