alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 55629.

#### Wing Woh Chong Hing Kee Co. *v.*United States,

protest 974115-G (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of kumquats similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Fung Chong Co.*(34 C. C. P. A. 40, C. A. D. 342). In accordance therewith the claim at 1 cent per pound under paragraph 743 was sustained.
* The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 02-3017

___________ William E. Hawkins, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern Unknown Agent, of the Federal * District of Missouri. Bureau of Investigation; Unknown * Deputy, United States Marshals for * [UNPUBLISHED] the Eastern District of Missouri, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: November 29, 2002 Filed: December 6, 2002

___________ Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Federal inmate William E. Hawkins appeals the district court's * preservice dismissal, without prejudice, of Hawkins's civil rights action, and the later denial of his motion for reconsideration. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude-2- the district court properly dismissed for the reasons stated in the court's ruling, and the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny Hawkins's pending in forma pauperis motion as moot. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a). A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1695-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the State of New Hampshire (FEMA-1695-DR), dated April 27, 2007, and related determinations. 

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         April 23, 2007.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this disaster is closed effective April 23, 2007. 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050, Individuals and Households Program—Other Needs; 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison, 

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. E7-9259 Filed 5-14-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
Exhibit 31.1

        CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14 OR 15d-14 OF THE SECURITIES
         EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Donald A. Goer, Chief Executive Officer of Intraop Medical Corporation
(the "Company"), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Company;

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

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

4. The registrant's other certifying 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 we have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

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

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


                                            /s/   Donald A. Goer
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Donald A. Goer
                                            Chief Executive Officer


                                            Date: May 10, 2006
#### B.A.H. and B.C.H, minors, and, H.H. and P.A.H., Petitioners/Respondents, v. C.C., Respondent/Appellant.

No. 73929.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

Sept. 29, 1998.

Nathan S. Cohen, Law Office of Nathan S. Cohen, Clayton, for Respondent/Appellant.

Leigh Joy Carson, Clayton, for Petitioners/Respondents.

Before SIMON, P.J., and CRANE and MOONEY, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

C.C. (biological mother) appeals from a Decree of Adoption terminating all rights and duties between her and her two minor children, pursuant to section 453.040, RSMo 1997. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that no error of law appears. As an extended opinion would have no precedential value, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum solely for the use of the parties has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision.
EXHIBIT
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**





**18
      U.S.C. 1350,**





**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**





**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of nFinanSe Inc. (the "Company") on Form
      10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jerry R. Welch,
      in
      my capacity as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002, that:





The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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











***/s/
                Jerry R. Welch***Date:  
                May 11, 2007
            Jerry
                R. Welch
              Chief
                Executive Officer
J.

(0) 1947A not warranted, and we therefore deny the petition. NRAP 21(b)(1); 

### Smith,

107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851.

It is so ORDERED. 1 Gibbons
Saitta cc: Hon. Elliott A. Sattler, District Judge Zachary B. Coughlin David Clifton

'Having considered the various documents filed by petitioner, we conclude that all other requests for relief made in this matter should be denied. SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1710 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 19, 2011 

Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

AN ACT 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 222 

West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska, as the James M. 

Fitzgerald United States Courthouse. 

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


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

S 1710 RFH

1 SECTION 1. JAMES M. FITZGERALD UNITED STATES COURT2 HOUSE. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The United States courthouse 

4 located at 222 West 7th Avenue, Anchorage, Alaska, shall 

5 be known and designated as the ‘‘James M. Fitzgerald 

6 United States Courthouse’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the United States courthouse referred to in sub10 section (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 

11 ‘‘James M. Fitzgerald United States Courthouse’’. 

Passed the Senate December 17, 2011. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Appellate case name: Lisa Davis v. Dalayna Smith

Appellate case number: 01-14-00806-CV

Trial court case number: PR-0074876A

Trial court: Probate Court of Galveston County

The record in this appeal was originally due on October 27, 2014. The clerk’s record was 

filed on November 13, 2014, but the reporter’s record has not been filed. On October 10, 2014, 

the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the court reporter responsible for preparing the 

record in this appeal had informed the Court that appellant had not (1) requested a reporter’s 

record or (2) paid, or made arrangements to pay, for the reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

35.3(b). The Clerk further notified appellant that unless she provided written evidence that she 

has paid, or made arrangements to pay, for the reporter’s record, or provided proof that she is 

entitled to proceed without payment of costs by November 10, 2014, the Court might consider 

the appeal without a reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P 37.3(c). Appellant failed to respond to 

the notice. Although the docketing statement filed by appellant on October 14, 2014 states that

she requested the reporter’s record and made arrangements to pay for the record, the court 

reporter filed an information sheet informing the Court that appellant’s docketing statement is 

incorrect and that appellant has neither requested nor paid for the reporter’s record.

Accordingly, the Court will consider and decide those issues or points that do not require 

a reporter’s record for a decision. See id. Appellant’s brief is ORDERED to be filed within 30 

days of the date of this order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). Given the delay caused by appellant, 

no extensions will be granted absent extraordinary circumstances.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Michael Massengale

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: February 26, 2015
No. 46522.

#### Protest 34051-K of H. Matsuo (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the articles consist of opera or field glasses similar to those the subject of *Woolworth*v. *United States*(2 Cust. Ct. 1, C. D. 74). In accordance therewith they were held dutiable at 35 percent under paragraph 228 (b) and the French Trade Agreement (T. D. 48316) as claimed.
p.1 

OAR Box 1818 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

66) ll-F-7 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 11/6/2008 3:12:46 PM Sheet 66 of 79 
P.2 

A-87-11 

II-F-07 

Inserts on rulemaking reproposal for draft preamble, Office 

of Management and Budget, transmitted to Frank Blake, U.S. EPA, 

July 1987 

Proposed Insert for Onboard Proposal 

Pursuant to Section 202 (a)(6), EPA must consult with the 

Secretary of Transportation with respect to motor vehicle safety 

before promulgating a requirement for onboard technology. Because 

of the statutory significance attached to this consultation, EPA 

commits to reopen the record of this rulemaking when the Agency 

receives the comments from the Secretary of Transportation. 

At that time, the Agency will specifically ask for comments 

on whether, in light of safety or other relevant concerns, the 

onboard regulation should be structured to provide an internal 

checkpoint or "second look" prior to the full commercial 

manufacture of vehicles equipped with onboard technology. The 

"second look" would provide, in effect, a formal mechanism for 

the Agency to reassess the desirability of going forward with 

an onboard requirement in light of potentially changed circumstances, such as further information on safety concerns, 

non-attainment status, lead time requirements or other issues. 

% X 
P.3 

Im 

I < *» 

*\ 

Proposed Insert for Onboard Proposal 

Pursuant to Section 202 (a)(6), EPA must consult with the 

Secretary of Transportation with respect to motor vehicle safety 

before promulgating a requirement for onboard technology. Because 

of the statutory significance attached to this consultation, EPA 

will reopen the record of this rulemaking when the Agency receives 

the comments from the Secretary of Transportation and will 

repropose the rule for comment to assess changed circumstances. 

This reproposal shall occur prior to final decision on the merits 

of the onboard reg. and sufficiently prior to the full commercial 

manufacture of vehicles with onboard technology to allow the 

public a meaningful opportunity to comment on whatever significant 

changes in circumstances may occur prior to full manufacture. In 

the reproposal, the Agency will specifically ask for comments on 

whether, in light of safety or other relevant concerns, the onboard 

regulation should be structured to provide an internal checkpoint 

or "second look" prior to the full commercial manufacture of 

vehicles equipped with onboard technology. The "second look" 

would provide, in effect, a formal mechanism for the Agency to 

reassess the desirability of going forward with an onboard 

requirement in light of potentially changed circumstances, such 

as further information on safety concerns, non-attainment status, 

lead time requirements or other issues.
```

[111th Congress Public Law 136]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[[Page 124 STAT. 6]]

Public Law 111-136
111th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
 Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and 
       for other purposes. <<NOTE: Jan. 29, 2010 -  [H.R. 4508]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF 
                              PROGRAMS UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS 
                              ACT AND THE SMALL BUSINESS 
                              INVESTMENT ACT OF 1958.

    (a) In General.--Section 1 of the Act entitled ``An Act to extend 
temporarily certain authorities of the Small Business Administration'', 
approved October 10, 2006 (Public Law 109-316; 120 Stat. 1742), as most 
recently amended by section 1 of Public Law 111-89 (123 Stat. 2975), is 
amended by striking ``January 31, 2010'' each place it appears and 
inserting ``April 30, 2010''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on January 30, 2010.

    Approved January 29, 2010.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4508:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010):
            Jan. 27, considered and passed House.
            Jan. 28, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 AS ADOPTED TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 
 
 
 I, Korina Houghton, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on 10-QSB of August Biomedical Corporation for the quarter ended May 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents in all material aspects the financial condition and results of operation of August Biomedical Corporation.
 
 
 
 
 
 By:
 
 /s/ Korina Houghton
 
 ________________________
 Name:                   Korina Houghton
 Title:                      Chief Financial Officer
 
 Date:                     July 21, 2003
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
LOKEN

- FLACK, LLC, A COLORA DO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, L YNN LOKEN, Plaintiffs

- Appellants

v.
NOVOZYMES BIOAG, INC ., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, Defendant

- Appellee

______________________
2015

- 1026

______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado in No. 1:13

- cv

- 01617

- MSK

- BNB, Judge Marcia S. Krieger.

______________________
JUDGMENT

______________________
A LAN B LAKLEY , Blakley Justice LLC, Longmont, CO, for plaintiffs

- appellants.

J OHN J. C OTTER , K&L Gates LLP, Boston, MA, argued for defendant

- appellee. Also represented by A NDREA B. R EED

.

______________________T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (R EYNA , P LAGER , and T ARANTO , Circuit Judges ).
AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

June 5, 2015 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court
# C_2015016EN.01000301.xml

| 19.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 12 November 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main — Germany) — Annett Altmann and Others v Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht

(Case C-140/13) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Approximation of laws - Directive 2004/39/EC - Article 54 - Obligation of professional secrecy incumbent on national financial supervisory authorities - Information concerning a fraudulent investment firm in compulsory liquidation)

(2015/C 016/03)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Frankfurt am Main

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Annett Altmann, Torsten Altmann, Hans Abel, Waltraud Apitzsch, Uwe Apitzsch, Simone Arnold, Barbara Assheuer, Ingeborg Aubele, Karl-Heinz Aubele

Defendant: Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht

Intervening party:Frank Schmitt

Operative part of the judgment

Article 54(1) and (2) of Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on markets in financial instruments amending Council Directives 85/611/EEC and 93/6/EEC and Directive 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 93/22/EEC must be interpreted as meaning that, in administrative proceedings, a national supervisory authority may rely on the obligation to maintain professional secrecy against a person who, in a case not covered by criminal law and not in a civil or commercial proceeding, requests it to grant access to information concerning an investment firm which is in judicial liquidation, even where that firm’s main business model consisted in large scale fraud and wilful harming of investors’ interests and several executives of that firm have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment.

---

(1)  OJ C 156, 1.6.2013.

---
# C_2016222EN.01004502.xml

| 20.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/45

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 29 April 2016 — Pedersen v Commission

(Case F-144/12) (1)

(2016/C 222/59)

Language of the case: French

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

---

(1)  OJ C 26, 26/1/2013, p. 77.

---