alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### DOWS v. WHITE.

September 16, 1837.

*Rule to show cause why judgment should not be entered,, for want of a sufficient affidavit of defence.*

An affidavit of defence, which averred that the consideration of a check, on which suit was brought, was for “ lottery tickets,” without stating that the sale was in Pennsylvania, was held defective, under the act of 28th March, 1836.

THIS action was brought on a check given by defendant to plaintiff. A copy was duly filed, and the defendant filed the following affidavit of defence:

“ Joseph White, being duly sworn, says, that he has a just and legal defence to the whole of the plaintiff’s demand, the nature and character of which is, that the instrument of writing or check whereon this action is founded, was given by this deponent for lottery tickets, and upon no other consideration whatever, purchased by this deponent from Santell, to whom or bearer said check was made payable.”

*Chew,*for plaintiff.

*Heiskell,*for defendant.

Authorities cited : 1 *Binney*170; *Roscoe on Bills*115.

Per Curiam.—The

affidavit of defence is not sufficiently certain. The consideration of the check may have been for lottery tickets sold the defendant in another state, where dealing in them is not prohibited, as in Pennsylvania, *(Stroud's Purd. tit. Gambling and Lotteries,)*and consequently the contract might not be illegal, and yet the affidavit be true as far as it goes. Leave is however given to file a supplemental affidavit of defence.

This was filed, averring the sale to have been in Philadelphia.

Rule discharged.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 216 (Tuesday, November 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 69252]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28923]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Science.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the DOE/NSF Nuclear Science 
Advisory Committee (NSAC). Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub L. 92-
463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be 
announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Hilton Washington DC North/Gaithersburg, 620 Perry Parkway, 
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20877, (301) 977-8900.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda L. May, U.S. Department of 
Energy; SC-26/Germantown Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-1290; Telephone: (301) 903-0536.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and guidance on a continuing 
basis to the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation 
on scientific priorities within the field of basic nuclear science 
research.
    Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include discussions of the following:

    Thursday, December 1, 2011.
     Perspectives from Department of Energy and National 
Science Foundation
     Update from the Department of Energy and National Science 
Foundation's Nuclear Physics Office's
     Update on the Neutron Charge Subcommittee Report
     Public Comment (10-minute rule)
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you 
would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do 
so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral 
statements regarding any of these items on the agenda, you should 
contact Brenda L. May, (301) 903-0536 or email: 
Brenda.May@science.doe.gov. You must make your request for an oral 
statement at least five business days before the meeting. Reasonable 
provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the 
agenda. The Chairperson of the Committee will conduct the meeting to 
facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow 
the 10-minute rule.
    Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available on the U.S. 
Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Physics Web site for viewing.

    Issued in Washington, DC on November 1, 2011.
Carol A. Matthews,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-28923 Filed 11-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, David A. Rane, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of SureBeam
Corporation (the "Registrant"), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, based on my knowledge:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant for the period ended
March 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

Dated: May 15, 2003                    By: /s/ David A. Rane
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           David A. Rane
                                           Senior Vice President and
                                           Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.116

AMENDMENT TO THE  EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This Amendment Agreement, made as of the 28th day of November, 2001 is between ATC Healthcare, Inc (formerly Staff Builders, Inc.) (the
"Company") and David Savitsky (the "Employee").

WHEREAS,
the Company and the Employee entered into an Employment Agreement, dated as of June 1, 1987, amended by Agreement dated October 31, 1991, January 3, 1992,
December 7, 1992 and (the "Agreement"), October 20, 1999.

WHEREAS,
the parties now desire to further amend the Agreement as provided herein;

NOW
THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:

Except
as expressly amended herein, all other terms, conditions, agreements, representations and warranties contained in the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of the date and year first above written:

| |  | ATC HEALTHCARE, INC.
| |  | --------------------
| |  | By                  
| |  | EMPLOYEE            
| |  |                     

---

QuickLinks
#### Joseph Giordano, Appellant, v Penconjope Corp., Doing Business as Broadway Video, Respondent.

[612 NYS2d 191]

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the *601plaintiff appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Brien, J.), entered June 26, 1992, which granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff Joseph Giordano was injured when he allegedly slipped and fell on a wet area of the floor near the entranceway of the defendant’s store. He claims, among other things, that the defendant should have known about the alleged dangerous condition created by the wet floor. The Supreme Court, however, found that the evidence adduced by the plaintiff at trial was insufficient to establish that the defendant had constructive notice of the subject condition. We agree.

"To constitute constructive notice, a defect must be visible and apparent and it must exist for a sufficient length of time prior to the accident to permit defendant’s employees to discover and remedy it” *(Gordon v American Museum of Natural History,*67 NY2d 836, 837). The record is devoid of evidence showing that the subject condition had existed for any more than a brief period of time prior to the plaintiff’s accident. Thus, the evidence was insufficient to charge the defendant with notice of that condition *(see, Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, supra; Paolucci v First Natl. Supermarket Co.,*178 AD2d 636; *cf., Negri v Stop & Shop,*65 NY2d 625; *Cincotta v Big V Supermarkets,*168 AD2d 818). Lawrence, J. P., Ritter, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1

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 Secured Data, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for
the period ending June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Jingan Wang, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. The Report 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 result of operations of the Company.

Date:  August 12, 2005


/S/ Jingan Wang
---------------
Jingan Wang
Chief Executive Officer
# C_2013141EN.01001601.xml

| 18.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 141/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/16

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) (United Kingdom) made on 18 March 2013 — Raytek GmbH, Fluke Europe BV v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

(Case C-134/13)

2013/C 141/29

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Raytek GmbH, Fluke Europe BV

Applicants:

Defendant: Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Is Commission Regulation (EU) No 314/2011 of 30 March 2011 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (1) valid in so far as it classifies infrared thermal cameras under CN code 9025 19 20?

1

---

(1)  OJ L 86, p. 57

1

---
#### T. D. Downing Co. *v.*United States

No. 6896.

Entry No. 4006, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, January 22, 1946, etc.

Certified January 22, 1946, etc.

Entered at Boston, Mass., February 5, 1946, etc.

(Decided February 19, 1947)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn (Hadley S. King*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

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

Oliveb, Presiding 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 importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion *

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-51203

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ADRIAN RANGEL,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:08-CR-242-ALL

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and GARZA and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Adrian Rangel appeals following his conviction for being a felon in

possession of a firearm. He argues that the district court’s 60-month sentence

was not reasonable and should be vacated. 

A defendant must object to a sentence as unreasonable in the district court

in order to preserve a substantive reasonableness challenge. United States v.

Peltier, 505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 2959 (2008).

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 17, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-51203

2

Rangel did not object to his sentence as unreasonable in the district court.

Accordingly, his argument is reviewed for plain error. Id. To show plain error,

the appellant must show an error that is clear or obvious and that affects his

substantial rights. United States v. Baker, 538 F.3d 324, 332 (5th Cir. 2008),

cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 962 (2009). If the appellant makes such a showing, this

court has the discretion to correct the error but only if it seriously affects the

fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id. 

When the district court imposes a sentence within a properly calculated

guidelines range and gives proper weight to the Guidelines and the 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) factors, this court gives “great deference to that sentence and will infer

that the judge has considered all the factors for a fair sentence set forth in the

Guidelines in light of the sentencing considerations set out in § 3553(a).” United

States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir.) (internal quotation

marks and citation omitted), cert denied, 129 S. Ct. 328 (2008). “A discretionary

sentence imposed within a properly calculated guidelines range is presumptively

reasonable.” Id.

The district court was authorized to sentence Rangel to up to 120 months

of imprisonment. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2). The court considered the § 3553(a)

factors, placing emphasis on the seriousness of the offense, the need to protect

the public, and the need for educational training and drug treatment. 

Rangel has shown neither that the district court’s sentence was

unreasonable nor that the sentence was plainly erroneous. See CamposMaldonado, 531 F.3d at 338; Baker, 538 F.3d at 332. His sentence is therefore

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 147 (Thursday, July 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41068-41069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20154]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 United States Code Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of 
the following National Institute of Child Health and Human Development 
Special Emphasis Panel (SEP) meeting:

    Name of SEP: NICHD Small Grant and Conference Grant Review 
(Teleconference).
    Date: August 18, 1997.
    Time: 10 a.m.-adjournment.
    Place: 6100 Executive Boulevard, 6100 Building--Room 5E01, 
Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    Contact Person: Edgar E. Hanna, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Administrator, NICHD, 6100 Executive Boulevard, 6100 Building-Room 
5E01, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Telephone: 301-496-1696.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate and review grant applications.
    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C. The 
discussions of the applications could reveal confidential trade 
secrets or commercial property such as patentable material and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. [93.864, 
Population Research and No. 93.865, Research Mothers and Children], 
National Institutes of Health)


[[Page 41069]]


    Dated: July 24, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-20154 Filed 7-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
No. 39244.

#### Protest 894949-G of Jordan Marsh Co. (Boston).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was shown that the merchandise in question is entirely of cotton. The claim at 44 percent under paragraph 909 and T. D. 46511 was therefore sustained.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-6470

LEVON TODD,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

LEWIS SMITH,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Robert J. Conrad, 

Jr., District Judge. (1:12-cv-00025-RJC)

Submitted: July 18, 2013 Decided: July 23, 2013

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Levon Todd, Appellant Pro Se. Mary Carla Hollis, Assistant 

Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Levon Todd seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. Parties 

are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s 

final judgment or order to note an appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 

4(a)(1)(A). The district court may, however, extend the time 

for filing a notice of appeal if a party so moves within thirty 

days after expiration of the original appeal period and 

demonstrates excusable neglect or good cause for the extension. 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A)(i)-(ii); Washington v. Bumgarner, 882 

F.2d 899, 900–01 (4th Cir. 1989).

The district court’s order dismissing Todd’s § 2254 

petition was entered on the docket on January 14, 2013. Thus, 

Todd had until February 13, 2013 to file a notice of appeal. 

The notice of appeal was filed, at the earliest, on February 23, 

2013.* Because Todd’s notice of appeal was filed beyond the 

expiration of the appeal period but within the thirty-day 

excusable neglect period, we construe as a timely request for an 

 * Although Todd’s notice of appeal indicates it was signed 

on February 23, 2013, Todd indicates in his informal brief that 

his notice of appeal was placed in his institution’s internal 

mailing system for mailing on March 7, 2013. See Houston v. 

Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988) (holding that a pro se prisoner’s 

notice of appeal is considered filed the moment it is delivered 

to prison authorities for mailing to the court).
3

extension of time the letter accompanying Todd’s notice of 

appeal. Accordingly, we remand this case to the district court 

for the limited purpose of determining whether Todd has 

demonstrated excusable neglect or good cause warranting an 

extension of the appeal period. The record, as supplemented, 

will then be returned to this court for further consideration.

REMANDED
<PAGE>



                    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,  Scott  C.  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 November
30,  2002  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/ Scott C. Houghton
                              ________________________
                    Name:     Scott C. Houghton
                    Title:    Chief Executive Officer




                    Date:     January  21,  2003
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

# DLA Aviation at Ogden employees celebrate Air Force Diamond Jubilee

By Leon Moore, DLA Aviation Public AffairsDLA Aviation Public Affairs Office

                RICHMOND, Va.  –              
Close to 20 Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Ogden employees and their spouses, including DLA Aviation at Ogden Commander Air Force Col. Jason Okumura, celebrated the Air Force’s 75th birthday. The Diamond Jubilee celebration took place at the Hill Aerospace Museum on Hill Air Force Base, Utah Sept. 24.

All those who attended were either active-duty Air Force, retired military, or are in a civilian leadership position within DLA Aviation at Ogden.

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

DLA AviationDLA Avation at OgdenHill Air Force BaseHill Aerospace MuseumAir Force 75th birthday