alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2100 

To suspend sales of petroleum products from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve 

until certain conditions are met. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2012 

Mr. VITTER (for himself, Mr. HOEVEN, and Mr. LUGAR) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To suspend sales of petroleum products from the Strategic 

Petroleum Reserve until certain conditions are met. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Strategic Petroleum 

5 Supplies Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON SALES FROM THE STRATEGIC PE7 TROLEUM RESERVE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection 

9 (b), the Administration shall not authorize a sale of petro10 leum products from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve esVerDate Mar 15 2010 23:56 Feb 13, 2012 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S2100.IS S2100

rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2100 IS

1 tablished under part B of title I of the Energy Policy and 

2 Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6231 et seq.) until the date 

3 on which all permits necessary under Executive Order 

4 13337 (3 U.S.C. 301 note; relating to issuance of permits 

5 with respect to certain energy-related facilities and land 

6 transportation crossings on the international boundaries 

7 of the United States) for the Keystone XL pipeline project 

8 application filed on September 19, 2008 (including amend9 ments) have been issued. 

10 (b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) shall not affect any 

11 obligations of the United States under the international 

12 energy program. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Pierre Roy, Eng., M.Sc., P.Eng.


Soutex Inc,
 357 Jackson, Bureau 7
 Quebec, Quebec, G1N 4C4,
 Canada
 
 
 
 
 To the Board of Directors of Rubicon Minerals Corporation (the “Company”)
 
 
 
 
 I, Pierre Roy, hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this annual report on Form-40 F for the year ended December 31, 2012 of the technical report titled “F2 Gold System - Phoenix Gold Project Bateman Township Red Lake, Canada Technical Report” dated effective August 8th 2011 (the “Technical Report”) and to extracts from, or a summary of, the Technical Report in the written disclosure contained in the Company’s annual information form for the financial year ended December 31, 2012 dated March 12th, 2013.
 
 
 Dated as of this 12th day of March, 2013
    
 
 Original signed by:
 
 
 “/s/ Pierre Roy”
 
 Pierre Roy, Eng., M.Sc., P.Eng.
 Senior Metallurgist
 Soutex Inc.
As discussed in detail above, STATIC ELECTRIC willoperate the DJI Phantom 3

Professional UASs safely in the NAS, without creating ahazard to users of the NAS, or

the public, or otherwise pose athreat to nationalsecurity.

As set forth herein, STATIC ELECTRIC seeks anexemption pursuant to 14 C.F.R. S 11.61

and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), which will

permit sat-e operation of the DJI Phantom 3 Professional UASs commercially, without an

airworthiness certificate, for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and

photography over certain areas of the United States. By granting this Petition, the FAA

Administrator will be fulfilling the Congressional mandate of the FAA Modernization and

Reform Act of 2012, while also advancing the interests of the public, by allowing STATIC

ELECTRIC to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the DJI Phantom 3 Professional

UASs cornmercially within the NAS.

WHEREFORE, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the FAA

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, STATIC ELECTRIC respectfully

requests that the Administrator grant this Petition for an exemption from the

requirementsof l4C.F.RSections6l.l l3(a)&(b),91 .7(a),91.121,91.151 (b),

91.405(a), 91.a07@)(l ), 91.409(axl ) & (a)(2), and 91.417 (a) & (b),

and permit STATIC ELECTRIC to operate the DJI Phantom 3 Professional UASs

commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain

areas of the United States.

Dated: July 15,2015

Respectful ly submitted,

Jrxa E

Scott E Erickson

Static Electric Owner/Operator

551 Trust Drive

Bayfield, CO 81"122

505-320-3592

Attachments:

Completed application for exemption

Link to DJI Professional users Manual

DJI Phantom 3 Professional Specifications

Signature page

28
(Reap. Dec. 9937)

#### Air Clearance Association, Inc., a/c Coro, Inc., et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 3581, etc.

(Decided March 7, 1961)

*Jolm D. Bode*for the plaintiffs.

*William JS. Orriclc, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant. .

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, are before • me for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that the issues in the appeals for reappraisement listed in the Schedule hereto annexed and made a part hereof are the same in all material respects as the issues in *Paramount Import Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States,*Reap. Dec. 9697 and that the record in said case may be incorporated herein.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appraised values of the merchandise involved in the cases listed in the Schedule hereto annexed less additions made by the importer on entry because of advances made by the Appraiser in similar cases is equal to the market value or the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Czechoslovakia in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, packed ready for delivery and that the foreign values of such or similar merchandise were no higher.

In the incorporated case, I held that a charge of 15 per centum, paid by the American importer to a foreign commissionaire for services rendered in connection with the purchase of merchandise in the foreign market and which amount did not inure to the benefit of the seller, was a *bona fide*buying commission that did not enter into the dutiable value of the merchandise.

On the agreed facts and following my cited decision on the law, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is export value, as defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, and hold that such statutory value therefor is the appraised values, less additions made by the importer on entry because of advances made by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

May 22, 2009

Mr. Adam Warren Aston

Assistant Solicitor General

P.O. Box 12548 (MC 059)

Austin, TX 78711-2548

Mr. Thomas F. Nye

Vidaurri, Lyde, Gault & Quintana, L.L.P.

717 Everhart, Suite A

Corpus Christi, TX 78411

Mr. Michael Brett Anthony

Anthony Peterson & Purnell LLP

500 North Water Street, Suite 1010

Corpus Christi, TX 78471

RE:Case Number:  07-1013

Court of Appeals Number:  04-06-00583-CV

Trial Court Number:  04-02-42222

Style:TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

v.

STEPHANIE GUTIERREZ AND RONNIE GUTIERREZ

Dear Counsel:

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

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosures

**Case No. 07-1013Page 1**
No. 55640.

#### Alliance Distributors, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 919838-G (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
Furnald Law 2150 E. Washington Ave. 

Madison, WI 53704

tel (608) 347-3471 

Joshua@furnlaw.com

March 2. 2016

U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Docket Operations

West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140

Washington, DC 20590

AMENDMENT TO: Exemption No. 14948 dated February 25, 2016

Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–8285

Dear Sir or Madam:

JMedia LLC is hereby amending Exemption No. 14948 (“Application”) also filed under 

Regulatory Docket FAA-2015-8285 to include the UAV:

• DJI Phantom 4

For all of the reasons listed in the Application, this Exemption Request is also in the 

public interest, within the FAA’s authority, and not a danger to the NAS. 

The UAS proposed by the petitioner and approved by the FAA in the initial application 

were the DJI Inspire 1, DJI Phantom 2, DJI Phantom 3, 3D Robotics Solo, 3D Robotics Iris, 

Walkera X350 Pro, Walkera Voyager 3, and Syma X8C. The DJI Phantom 4 merely 

expands upon the safety features available in the DJI Phantom 2 and DJI Phantom 3.

Manufactured by DJI, Model – Phantom 4

A lightweight UAV (3.04 lb. gross weight with all on-board equipment), battery operated 

4-motor rotorcraft in the form of a quadcopter that takes off and lands vertically.

THE UAV SUMMARY 

• An on-board flight computer with GPS navigation and location ability that 

receives signals for flight controls from a ground-based transmitter/controller; 

• An on-board camera capable of capturing imagery in the form of full color, high 

definition still photos and video;

• An on-board telemetry system that delivers flight data from the on-board flight 

computer to the on-board radio transmitter including altitude AGL, horizontal 

and vertical speed, compass direction of flight and direction back to its launch 

site;

• Various safety systems including return to launch point in case of communication 

or mechanical failure. 
Page 2 of 2

SUMMARY OF THE GROUND STATION BASED PART OF THE SYSTEM 

• A Pilot in Command (PIC) in operational control of a flight operation from 

beginning to end and who controls the UAV while in the air; 

• A 100mW, 2.4GHz radio transmitter/controller operated by the PIC to control 

the UAV while in flight at frequency 2400 GHz to 2483 GHz;

• A radio receiver receiving live video and flight data from the on-board camera 

and computer projects it all together onto a screen for the PIC to view during 

flight; 

• A Visual Observer (VO) is a person who provides a second pair of eyes to visually 

track the UAV while in flight. 

A full list of features, components, and specifications for the DJI Phantom 4 at the 

following link:

http://www.dji.com/product/phantom-4/info

If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact our office.

Sincerely,

Joshua Furnald, Esq.

Furnald Law

2150 East Washington Ave. 

Madison, Wisconsin 53704

608) 347-3471
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM IMATRON
INC.'S CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED
BALANCE SHEETS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                        0000720477
<NAME>                                        Imatron Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     $
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997 
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         14,425
<SECURITIES>                                      180
<RECEIVABLES>                                   9,653
<ALLOWANCES>                                    2,758
<INVENTORY>                                    12,926
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               37,645
<PP&E>                                         19,379
<DEPRECIATION>                                  9,020
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 49,223
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          11,595
<BONDS>                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                       90,728
<OTHER-SE>                                        0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   34,968
<SALES>                                        39,423
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               39,423
<CGS>                                          31,879
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  31,879
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                578
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,678)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               0
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0                              
<CHANGES>                                         0 
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,422)                              
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.15)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2012227EN.01003802.xml

| 28.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 227/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 227/38

---

Action brought on 11 June 2012 — ZZ and ZZ v Commission

(Case F-61/12)

2012/C 227/65

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicants: ZZ and ZZ (represented by: D. Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis, É. Marchal and S. Orlandi, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of proposals for transfer of pension rights acquired before entering the service of the Commission on the basis of the calculation taking into account new GIP (general implementing provisions) entering into force after the applicants’ applications for transfer.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decisions rejecting the applicants’ complaints seeking the application of the GIP and actuarial rates in force when their applications for transfer of pension rights were made; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decisions rejecting the applicants’ complaints seeking the application of the GIP and actuarial rates in force when their applications for transfer of pension rights were made;

| — | So far as necessary, annul the decisions concerning calculation of the value of their pension rights acquired before they entered the service of the Commission; |
| --- | --- |

—

So far as necessary, annul the decisions concerning calculation of the value of their pension rights acquired before they entered the service of the Commission;

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

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

---
Case No. 10,057.

#### NAUNTON v. The OREGON.

[1 Pac. Law Mag. 242.]

District Court, D. California.

March 22, 1867

Collision — Steam and Sail — Lights.

On the night of May 21st, 1866, about twenty miles from Carmen Island, the Oregon ran into and sunk the bark Kent, which was becalmed. Hence this libel. The steamer had all lights set required by the act of congress. The bark did not have her red and green lights set, as required by the act of parliament, which is identical with the act of congress. The bark was not discovered until the steamer was close upon her. The bark had a bright white light in her main rigging. Weather clear and sea calm. The captain saw the steamer some two miles off, but had no thought of a collision.

Held, that although the bark was in fault in not displaying the proper lights, still, under the circumstances, would the steamer have seen the bark if she had had the colored lights up? To apply the strict rule would be harsh. I hold, and shall, till otherwise instructed, that under the circumstances of a ship becalmed in a remote sea and in such weather, the damage to both ships must be divided.

Ordered, that the damage to both vessels be found and the libellants recover one-half that amount with costs.
# C_2014421EN.01001301.xml

| 24.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 September 2014 — Società Italiana Calzature SpA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Vicini SpA

(Joined Cases C-308/13 P and C-309/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeals - Community trade marks - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Registration of figurative marks containing the word elements ‘GIUSEPPE ZANOTTI DESIGN’ and ‘BY GIUSEPPE ZANOTTI’ - Opposition by the proprietor of word and figurative, national and community, trade marks, containing the word element ‘ZANOTTI’ - Opposition dismissed by the Board of Appeal))

2014/C 421/16

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Società Italiana Calzature SpA (represented by: A. Rapisardi and C. Ginevra, avvocati)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock acting as agent), Vicini SpA (represented by: M. Franzosi and C. Giorgetti, avvocati)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeals; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeals;

| 2. | Orders Società Italiana Calzature SpA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Società Italiana Calzature SpA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 233, 10.08.2013.

1

---
#### Abraham & Strauss, Inc., et al. *v.*United States

No. 6886.

Entry No. 762919, etc.

Invoices dated Hucknall, England, April 16, 1946, etc.

Certified April 19, 1946, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., May 23, 1946, etc.

(Decided February 17, 1947)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiffs.

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

Cole, Judge (Abstract):

These appeals for reappraisement of various items of merchandise concern the so-called British purchase tax, described in the law of the United Kingdom entitled, “Finance (No. 2) Act 1940 3 & 4 Geo. 6 Ch. 48.” The said tax was held not to be an item to be included in foreign value as defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (c)). *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*33 C. C. P. A. 183, C. A. D. 334.

An agreed set of facts shows export value, section 402 (d) of the Thriff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (d)), to be the proper basis for appraisement of the instant merchandise, and that such statutory values for the articles in question are the appraised values less additions made by the importers on entry because of advances in similar cases.
SIGNATURES

     Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this annual report on Form
10-K authorized, in the City of New York and State of New York on the 15th day
of March 2004.



SMITH BARNEY AAA ENERGY FUTURES FUND L.P.



By:  Citigroup Managed Futures LLC
     (General Partner)



By /s/ David J. Vogel
       David J. Vogel, President & Director



     Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this
annual report on Form 10-K has been signed below by the following persons in the
capacities and on the date indicated.





/s/ David J. Vogel                               /s/ Shelley Ullman
    David J. Vogel                                   Shelley Ullman
    Director, Principal Executive                    Director
    Officer and President



/s/ Maureen O'Toole                              /s/ Steve J.Keltz
    Maureen O'Toole                                  Steve J. Keltz
    Director                                         Secretary and Director



/s/ Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.
    Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr.
    Chief Financial Officer and Director
No. 45344.

#### Protest 921703-G of N. Y. Merchandise Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the bookends in question were held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 339. Abstract 28750 followed.
# C_2013233EN.01000901.xml

| 10.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 233/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 233/9

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2013 — Warsteiner Brauerei Haus Cramer v OHIM

(Case T-243/12) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark ALOHA 100 % NATURAL - Earlier national word mark ALOA - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

2013/C 233/15

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Warsteiner Brauerei Haus Cramer KG (formerly International Brands Germany GmbH & Co. KG) (Warstein, Germany) (represented by: B. Hein and M.-H. Hoffman, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, then by A. Schifko, Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Stuffer SpA (Bolzano, Italy) (represented by: F. Jacobacci, 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 First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 March 2012 (Case R 1058/2011-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Stuffer SpA and Warsteiner Brauerei Haus Cramer KG, formerly International Brands Germany GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Warsteiner Brauerei Haus Cramer KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Warsteiner Brauerei Haus Cramer KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 217, 21.7.2012.

1

---