alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 146 (Wednesday, July 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 40841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19969]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT


Bureau for Global Programs, Field Support and Research, Office of 
Environment and Urban Programs Certificate of the Director

    I, Viviann Gary, Director, Office of Environment and Urban 
Programs, Bureau for Global Programs, Field Support and Research, U.S. 
Agency for International Development, an agency of the United States of 
America, do hereby certify that during fiscal year 1997, for the 
purposes of the Housing Guaranty Standard Terms and Conditions (22 CFR 
Part 204 (1996) (``Standard Term''), the authorized representatives of 
USAID are:

Viviann Gary
Ronald Carlson
David Painter
Michael Enders

    Any promissory note having the guaranty legend signed, either by 
manual of facsimile signature, by one of such persons shall constitute 
an ``Eligible Note'' (as defined in the Standard Terms) entitled to the 
benefit of the Standard Terms.
    In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this 11th day of 
July 1997.
Viviann Gary,
Director, Office of Environment and Urban Programs, Bureau for Global 
Programs, Field Support and Research, U.S. Agency for International 
Development.
[FR Doc. 97-19969 Filed 7-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116-01-M
No. 47735.

#### Protests 639891-G, etc., of Cohn & Lewis et al (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel, that certain of the items consist of “8-Bu. paper hats,” and following *Caradine*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 69, C. D. 664), the claim at 25 percent under paragraph 1504(b) (5) was sustained.
# C_2014421EN.01001501.xml

| 24.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/15

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 2 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État — France) — Société Fonderie 2A v Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances

(Case C-446/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Sixth VAT Directive - Article 8(1)(a) - Determination of the place of supply of goods - Supplier established in a Member State other than the Member State in which the person to whom the goods are supplied is established - Processing of the goods in the Member State where the person to whom the goods are supplied is established))

2014/C 421/20

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Conseil d'État

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Société Fonderie 2A

Applicant:

Defendant: Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 8(1)(a) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995, must be interpreted as meaning that the place of supply of goods sold by a company established in a Member State to a person established in another Member State, and on which the vendor, to make them fit to be supplied, has had finishing work carried out by a service provider established in that other Member State, before having them dispatched by the service provider to the person to whom they are being supplied, must be deemed to be in the Member State where the latter is established.

---

(1)  OJ C 304, 19.10.2013.

1

---
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1217 

CA 13-02070 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CENTRA, FAHEY, LINDLEY, AND WHALEN, JJ. 

 

PEGGY J. SMITH, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CITY OF BUFFALO, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

 

FRANK S. FALZONE, BUFFALO (LOUIS ROSADO OF COUNSEL), FOR

PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT. 

TIMOTHY A. BALL, CORPORATION COUNSEL, BUFFALO (DAVID M. LEE OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Timothy

J. Walker, A.J.), entered January 22, 2013. The order granted the

motion of defendant for leave to reargue, and upon reargument, granted

the motion of defendant for summary judgment and dismissed the

complaint. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this action seeking damages for injuries that

plaintiff allegedly sustained when she fell into an uncovered manhole,

plaintiff appeals from an order that granted defendant’s motion for

leave to reargue its prior motion for summary judgment dismissing the

complaint and, upon reargument, granted the prior motion. In seeking

reargument, defendant again asserted that it did not receive prior

written notice of the dangerous condition as required by its local

law. Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, Supreme Court properly

granted the motion for leave to reargue. The court originally denied

the prior motion on the ground that issues of fact precluded summary

judgment, and upon reargument the court determined that the motion

raised issues of law that must be decided by the court, including

whether the local law applies to this case. “A motion for leave to

reargue . . . shall be based upon matters of fact or law allegedly

overlooked or misapprehended by the court in determining the prior

motion” (CPLR 2221 [d]). Thus, a motion for leave “to reargue ‘may be

granted only upon a showing that the court overlooked or

misapprehended the facts or the law, or for some reason mistakenly

arrived at its earlier decision’ ” (Andrea v E.I. Du Pont De Nemours &

Co. [appeal No. 2], 289 AD2d 1039, 1040-1041, lv denied 97 NY2d 609). 

Here, contrary to plaintiff’s contention, the court properly granted

leave to reargue after concluding that it had misapprehended the law,

because the issue whether the prior written notice statute applied was
-2- 1217 

CA 13-02070 

one of law for the court to decide, rather than one of fact for the

jury (see generally Cayuga Indian Nation of N.Y. v Gould, 14 NY3d 614,

635, cert denied ___ US ___, 131 S Ct 353; Matter of Held v New York

State Workers’ Compensation Bd., 58 AD3d 971, 972-973). 

Entered: November 21, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         282,003
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,993,852
<ALLOWANCES>                                   411,707
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,762,177
<PP&E>                                      32,966,177
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,088,201
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              75,160,692
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,335,814
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,124
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,614,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                75,160,692
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            41,813,333
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               55,292,253
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               225,845
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,170,351
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (15,875,116)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   571,060
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 86,817
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (16,359,359)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.58)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.58)


</TABLE>
Consent of Independent Auditors



The Board of Directors
SJNB Financial Corp.


We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the registration  statements on
Form S-8 (Nos.  33-31392 and  333-89013) of SJNB  Financial  Corp. of our report
dated  January 17,  2001,  relating to the  consolidated  balance sheets of SJNB
Financial Corp. and subsidiary as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the related
consolidated  statements  of  income,  shareholders  equity  and  comprehensive
income,  and cash  flows for each of the years in the  three-year  period  ended
December 31,  2000, which report appears in the December 31,  2000 annual report
on Form 10-K/A of SJNB Financial Corp.







s/KPMG LLP
San Francisco, California
April 24, 2001
Exhibit 32.1

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Hugo
International Telecom, Inc. (the "Company"), certifies that:

1.   The  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB of the  Company for the three  months
     ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
     Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
     78m or 78o(d)); and

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




By:            /S/ Kevin Kreisler
               -------------------------------
                   Kevin Kreisler
                   Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Date:              January 24, 2006


This  certification  is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C.  Section  1350,
subject  to the  knowledge  standard  contained  therein,  and not for any other
purpose.
#### David Ashley, Inc., et al. *v.*United States

No. 6928.

Entry No. 767288, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, May 10, 1946, etc.

Certified May 13, 1946, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., June 11, 1946, etc.

(Decided February 26, 1947)

*John D. Rode*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 32.2

                            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 Coventure  International  Inc.
(the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending  October 31, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Xiaogang Zhu, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 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 and 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.



Date:  December 14, 2005                           By: /s/ XIAOGANG ZHU
                                                       ----------------
                                                       Xiaogang Zhu
                                                       Chief Financial Officer
#### George Conover, appellant, v. Guarantee Trust Company et al., respondents.

[Decided October 11th, 1918.]

On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Learning, whose opinion is reported in *88 N. J. Eq. 450.*

*Mr. William M. Clevenger,*for the appellant.

*Mr. Clarence L.*Cole, for the respondents.

Per Curiam.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Learning.

*585
      *For affirmance*— The Chief-Justice, Swayze, Trenchard, Bergen, Minturn, Kalisch, Black, Heppenheimer — 8.

*For reversal*— Williams, Taylor, Gardner — 3.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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  Central  Jersey  Bancorp  (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Report"),  I,
Anthony  Giordano,  III,  Executive Vice  President,  Chief  Financial  Officer,
Treasurer and Assistant Secretary of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C.  ss.1350,  as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to my knowledge:

(1)   the Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of ss.13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. ss.78m or 78o(d), 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 14, 2006              /s/ Anthony Giordano, III
                                    ------------------------------------------
                                    Anthony Giordano, III
                                    Executive Vice President, Chief Financial
                                    Officer, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary
Order entered May 1 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 12
- 01522
- CR
EX PARTE KEITH D. ROANE



### ORDER ON REHEARING
Before Justices Bridges, O’Neill, and Murphy Appellant’s March 29, 2013 motion for rehearing, to ab ate for a rule 38.8(b) hearing, and for leave to file a reporter’s record is DENIED

. This Court erred when it notified a ppellant the case would be abated for a rule 38.8(b) hearing because appellant does not have a right to a hearing under that rule

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8(b); see also Burton v. State , 267 S.W.3d 101 , 103 (Tex. App.

— Corpus Christi

– Edinburg 2008, no pet.); Wade v. State , 31 S.W.3d 723 , 725 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d). In the interest of justice, the Court WITHDRAWS its opinion and judgment filed on March 13, 2013. Appellant is ORDERED to file his brief within TEN DAYS of the date of this order. In the event appellant fails to file his brief, the case will be submitted without appell ant’s brief.The appeal will be resubmitted after the time for filing briefs has expired.

/s/ MARY MURPHY JUSTICE
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 194 

To reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating taxpayer financing 

of presidential election campaigns and party conventions. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 26, 2011 

Mr. MCCONNELL (for himself, Mr. COBURN, and Mr. JOHANNS) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Finance 

A BILL 

To reduce Federal spending and the deficit by terminating 

taxpayer financing of presidential election campaigns and 

party conventions. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. TERMINATION OF TAXPAYER FINANCING OF 

4 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS. 

5 (a) TERMINATION OF DESIGNATION OF INCOME TAX

6 PAYMENTS.—Section 6096 of the Internal Revenue Code 

7 of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following 

8 new subsection: 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 194 IS

1 ‘‘(d) TERMINATION.—This section shall not apply to 

2 taxable years beginning after December 31, 2009.’’. 

3 (b) TERMINATION OF FUND AND ACCOUNT.— 

4 (1) TERMINATION OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

5 CAMPAIGN FUND.— 

6 (A) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 95 of subtitle 

7 H of such Code is amended by adding at the 

8 end the following new section: 

9 ‘‘SEC. 9014. TERMINATION. 

10 ‘‘The provisions of this chapter shall not apply with 

11 respect to any presidential election (or any presidential 

12 nominating convention) after the date of the enactment 

13 of this section, or to any candidate in such an election.’’. 

14 (B) TRANSFER OF EXCESS FUNDS TO GEN15 ERAL FUND.—Section 9006 of such Code is 

16 amended by adding at the end the following 

17 new subsection: 

18 ‘‘(d) TRANSFER OF FUNDS REMAINING AFTER TER19 MINATION.—The Secretary shall transfer all amounts in 

20 the fund after the date of the enactment of this section 

21 to the general fund of the Treasury.’’. 

22 (2) TERMINATION OF ACCOUNT.—Chapter 96 

23 of subtitle H of such Code is amended by adding at 

24 the end the following new section: 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 194 IS

1 ‘‘SEC. 9043. TERMINATION. 

2 ‘‘The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to any 

3 candidate with respect to any presidential election after 

4 the date of the enactment of this section.’’. 

5 (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.— 

6 (1) The table of sections for chapter 95 of sub7 title H of such Code is amended by adding at the 

8 end the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 9014. Termination.’’. 

9 (2) The table of sections for chapter 96 of sub10 title H of such Code is amended by adding at the 

11 end the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 9043. Termination.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
No. M-21.

No. M-22.

#### Kennedy et al. *v.*Goldin, Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration; and Orozco et ux. *v.*Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

Motions to direct the Clerk to file petitions for writs of certiorari out of time denied.
Robert
D. Thomas, Jr., CPG 10314




5040
Pleasant View Drive,


Sparks,
Nevada, USA


89434




Phone       (775)
843-6240


Fax           (775)
331-8352


Email   rdtxplore@charter.net






TO:




United
      States Securities and Exchange Commission
            The
      Toronto Stock ExchangeBritish
      Columbia Securities Commission
            Alberta
      Securities CommissionSaskatchewan
      Financial Services Commission
            The
      Manitoba Securities CommissionOntario
      Securities Commission
            Autorité
      des marchés financiersNew
      Brunswick Securities Commission
            Nova
      Scotia Securities CommissionPrince
      Edward Island Securities Office
            Government
      of Newfoundland and LabradorRubicon
      Minerals Corporation




I, Robert
D. Thomas, Jr. CPG., do hereby consent to the filing, with the regulatory
authorities referred to above, of the technical report titled “Exploration
Activities of Rubicon Minerals Corporation on the McFinley Property, Red Lake
Ontario for the period January 2006 to October 2008” and dated January 9, 2009
(the “Technical Report”) and to its use for obtaining any required regulatory
acceptance or approvals in connection with the Property which is the subject
matter of the Technical Report.




I also
certify that I have read the written disclosure being filed and that it fairly
and accurately represents the information in the Technical Report or that
supports the disclosure.




Dated
this31stday
of March, 2010.




Signed:“Robert D.
Thomas,Jr.”




Robert D.
Thomas, Jr., CPG 10314
#### Bloomingdale Bros., Inc., et al *v.*United States

No. 7785.

Entry No. 732663, etc.

(Decided January 26, 1950)

*John D. Bode*for the plaintiffs.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawrenoe, Judge:

It has been agreed between the parties hereto that the issues herein relating to the merchandise the subject of these appeals are the same in all material respects as those decided in *United States*v. *Gothic Watch Co.,*23 Cust. Ct. 235, Reap. Dec. 7712, affirming the judgment in *Gothic Watch Co.*v. *United States,*19 Cust. Ct. 309, Reap. Dec. 7438, and that the record in Reap. Dec. 7712, *supra,*may be incorporated herein.

Upon the agreed facts, I find that the attempted appraisement embodied in the second return of value by the appraiser of the merchandise covered by each of the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the annexed schedule, which is marked *“A”*and made a part of this decision, was illegal, null, and void, and that the appraiser’s original return of value in each case, as reported by him to the collector of customs, constituted his appraisal of the merchandise pursuant to section 500 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1500), and was final and conclusive in the absence of any appeal pursuant to section 501 of said act (19 U. S. C. § 1501).

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
No. 55647.

#### Monticello Industries, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 126156-K, etc. (Buffalo).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 45359.

#### Protests 49035-K, etc., of D. & A. Sclafani et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation df counsel and on the authority of *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 49302) the prdtests were sustained.