alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.1

November 28, 2006

Company Press Release

Source: Salisbury Bancorp, Inc.

Salisbury Contact: John F. Perotti-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                   (860) 435-9801 x 1001

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Salisbury Bancorp, Inc. Announces Fourth Quarter Dividend

Lakeville, Connecticut,  November 28, 2006/PRNewswire...  The Board of Directors
of Salisbury Bancorp,  Inc.  (AMEX:SAL),  the holding company for Salisbury Bank
and Trust Company  declared a $.26 per common share  quarterly  cash dividend at
their November 27, 2006 meeting. Dividends year-to-date for 2006 total $1.04 per
common share. This represents an increase of $.04 or 4% over the $1.00 per share
cash  dividends paid during the same period in 2005. The quarterly cash dividend
will be paid on January 31, 2007 to  shareholders  of record as of December  29,
2006.

Salisbury  Bancorp's sole  subsidiary,  Salisbury  Bank and Trust Company,  is a
community  bank. The Company has assets in excess of $400 million and capital in
excess of $40 million,  and continues to serve the  communities of  northwestern
Connecticut and proximate communities in New York and Massachusetts which it has
done  for  approximately  150  years.   Salisbury  Bank  and  Trust  Company  is
headquartered  in Lakeville,  Connecticut  and  presently  operates full service
branches in Canaan,  Salisbury and Sharon,  Connecticut  and South  Egremont and
Sheffield,  Massachusetts.  The Bank offers a full  complement  of consumer  and
business banking products and services as well as trust and investment services.

Statements  contained in this news release contain  forward  looking  statements
within the  meaning of the  Private  Securities  Litigation  Reform Act of 1995.
These statements are based on the beliefs and expectations of management as well
as the assumptions  made using  information  currently  available to management.
Since these statements reflect the views of management concerning future events,
these statements involve risks,  uncertainties and assumptions,  including among
others:  changes in market  interest  rates and  general and  regional  economic
conditions; changes in government regulations; changes in accounting principles;
and the quality or composition  of the loan and investment  portfolios and other
factors that may be described in the  Company's  quarterly  reports on Form 10-Q
and its annual report on Form 10-K,  each filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission,  which are  available at the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission's
internet website (www.sec.gov) and to which reference is hereby made. Therefore,
actual future  results may differ  significantly  from results  discussed in the
forward looking statements.


                                      -3-
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-41203

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

RUBEN LUJANO-GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:09-CR-676-1

Before KING, BENAVIDES, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Ruben Lujano-Gonzalez was convicted of one charge of illegal reentry into

the United States and was sentenced to serve 21 months in prison as well as a

three-year term of supervised release. This appeal was filed to challenge his

sentence, which he argues was improper because it was based on the district

court’s flawed determination that his prior state convictions for simple

possession of marijuana qualified as an aggravated felony for purposes of

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

July 30, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 09-41203 Document: 00511189837 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/30/2010
No. 09-41203

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C). In his opening brief, Lujano-Gonzalez correctly

conceded that this argument was foreclosed by our prior caselaw.

However, following the completion of briefing in this case, the Supreme

Court released Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, __ S. Ct. __, 2010 WL 2346552

(June 14, 2010) (No. 09-60), which undermined our prior case law on this topic.

Relying on Carachuri-Rosendo, Lujano-Gonzalez has filed an unopposed motion

to vacate the judgment, remand for resentencing, and issue the mandate

forthwith. That motion is GRANTED. The judgment of the district court is

VACATED, and this case is REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING. The

MANDATE SHALL ISSUE FORTHWITH.

2

Case: 09-41203 Document: 00511189837 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/30/2010
Before the First Division,

November 7, 1941

No. 46564.

#### Protest 963639-G of S. H. Kress & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the rubber mice in question are similar to those the subject of Abstract 40389. In accordance therewith they were held dutiable at 45 percent under paragraph 409 as composed in part of bamboo, as claimed.
No. 48939.

#### Protests 35642-K, etc., of Borden Co. et al. (New York).

*302Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and cited cases, the court, in order to compensate for foreign substances on the outside of certain cheese, granted: (1) 21⁄2 percent allowance for cheese similar to that the subject of *Scaramelli*v. *United States*(9 Cust. Ct. 270, C. D. 706) and Abstracts 42146 and 48269, and (2) an allowance for the weight of the paper or foil, or both, in which certain cheese was wrapped, following *Kraft Phenix Cheese Corp.*v. *United States*(T. D. 47955). Protests sustained to this extent.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2174 

To exempt natural gas vehicles from certain maximum fuel economy increase 

standards, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 8, 2012 

Mr. INHOFE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To exempt natural gas vehicles from certain maximum fuel 

economy increase standards, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NATURAL GAS VEHICLES. 

4 (a) MAXIMUM FUEL ECONOMY INCREASE FOR AL5 TERNATIVE FUEL AUTOMOBILES.—Section 32906(a) of 

6 title 49, United States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘(ex7 cept an electric automobile)’’ and inserting ‘‘(except an 

8 electric or natural gas automobile)’’. 

9 (b) AUTOMOBILE FUEL ECONOMY DEFINITIONS.— 

10 Section 32901(a)(8) of title 49, United States Code, is 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2174 IS

1 amended by inserting ‘‘, but the inclusion of a reserve gas2 oline tank for incidental or emergency use in the event 

3 of alternative fuel depletion shall not detract from the 

4 dedicated nature of the automobile’’ before the period at 

5 the end. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit
        23.1**
 
 **Consent
        of the Independent Public Accounting Firm - Clifton D. Bodiford,
        CPA**
  
 Exhibit
        23.1
 
 
 **CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
 
 We
        have
        issued our report dated January 13, 2006 accompanying the consolidated financial
        statements included in the Annual Report of First Community Corporation on
        Form
        10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005. We hereby consent to the
        incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements
        of
        First Community Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 333-119630) and on Form
        S-8
        (File No. 333-90603).
 
 /s/
        Clifton D. Bodiford, CPA
 Clifton
        D. Bodiford, CPA
  Columbia,
        South Carolina
 March
        26,
        200 7
#### Crysler Watch Co. et al. *v.*United States

No. 7775.

Entry No. 32156, etc.

(Decided January 20, 1950)

*Lane, Young & Fox (William H. Fox*of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

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

LawreNCe, 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. 45363.

#### Protests 632828-G, etc., of Brown & Sites Co., Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Locatelli*v. *United States*(T. D. 49302 and T. D. 49389) it was held that an allowance in weight should have been made to compensate for the inedible covering on the outside of the cheese in question.
#### Timothy WITKO, a minor by and through his guardian and next friend, Charladean E. Witko, and Charladean E. Witko, Individually, Appellants, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellees.

No. 76-1551.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 1, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 10, 1977.

*53Gary A. Esler, Esler & Kirsehbaum, Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

William D. Ricker, Jr., and Ronald A. Fitzgerald, Fleming, O’Bryan & Fleming, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The question presented in this appeal is whether a minor plaintiff, who does not own a motor vehicle, may recover personal injury protection benefits under the Florida Automobile Reparations Act from the insurer of a motor vehicle which struck and injured him while he was a pedestrian, when such plaintiff was a resident of the household of his mother who owned a motor vehicle for which security was required, but which motor vehicle was uninsured. Based upon the reasons and rationale expressed by our sister districts in *Commercial Union Insurance Co. v. Williams,*309 So.2d 617 (Fla.lst DCA 1975); *Farley v. Gateway Ins. Co.,*302 So.2d 177 (Fla.2d DCA 1974); and *Gateway Insurance Co. v. Butler,*293 So.2d 738 (Fla.3d DCA 1974), the question posed is answered in the affirmative and the summary final judgment entered in favor of the defendant-appellee is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent herewith.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

MAGER, C. J., and DAUKSCH, J., and KANEY, FRANK N., Associate Judge, concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2367 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2367

    To strike the word ``lunatic'' from Federal law, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 25, 2012

 Mr. Conrad (for himself and Mr. Crapo) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To strike the word ``lunatic'' from Federal law, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``21st Century Language Act of 2012''.

SEC. 2. MODERNIZATION OF LANGUAGE REFERRING TO PERSONS WHO ARE MENTALLY 
              ILL.

    (a) Words Denoting Number, Gender, and So Forth.--Section 1 of 
title 1, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``and `lunatic'''; and
            (2) by striking ``lunatic,''.
    (b) Banking Law Provisions.--
            (1) Trust powers.--The first section of the Act entitled 
        ``An Act to place authority over the trust powers of national 
        banks in the Comptroller of the Currency'', approved September 
        28, 1962 (12 U.S.C. 92a), is amended--
                    (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``committee of 
                estates of lunatics,''; and
                    (B) in subsection (b), by striking ``committee of 
                estates of lunatics''.
            (2) Consolidation and mergers of banks.--The National Bank 
        Consolidation and Merger Act (12 U.S.C. 215 et seq.) is 
        amended--
                    (A) in section 2 (12 U.S.C. 215)--
                            (i) in subsection (e), by striking 
                        ``receiver, and committee of estates of 
                        lunatics'' and inserting ``and receiver''; and
                            (ii) in subsection (f), by striking 
                        ``receiver, or committee of estates of 
                        lunatics'' and inserting ``or receiver''; and
                    (B) in section 3 (12 U.S.C. 215a)--
                            (i) in subsection (e), by striking 
                        ``receiver, and committee of estates of 
                        lunatics'' and inserting ``and receiver''; and
                            (ii) in subsection (f), by striking 
                        ``receiver, or committee of estates of 
                        lunatics'' and inserting ``or receiver''.
                                 <all>
```
### ATTACHMENT 1 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION

TO: County Clerk County of Ventura

800 South Victoria Avenue

Ventura, CA 93009

FROM: Ventura County Air Pollu tion Control District 669 County Square Drive

Ventura, CA 93003

DATE: April 8, 2008

Project Title: Revisions to Rule 74.12, Surface Coa ting of Metal Parts and Products

Project Location -- Specific: District Wide

Project Location -- City: See above Project Location -- County: Ventura County

Description of Project:

The project revises the reactive organic compound (ROC) limit for general air-dry onecomponent coatings and creates a new multi- component coating category. A limit for labfurniture coatings is deleted. Also, 25 grams per liter solvents are required for surface preparation, spray gun cleaning and general purpose cl eanup. These revisions are required because, under the provisions of Health and Safety Code section 40914(b )(2), staff must provide for expeditious implementation of "e very feasible measure" to re duce ozone precursor emissions.

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: Ventura County Air Pollu tion Control District Date Approved: April 8, 2008

Name of Person or Agen cy Carrying Out Project: Ventura County Air Pollu tion Control District

Exempt Status: The revisions to Rule 74.12 are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Sections 15307 and 15308 of the state CEQA Guidelines and no exceptions to these exemptions apply.

Reasons Why Project Is Exempt: The revisions to Rule 74.12 are categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA because reactive organic compound emissions from coating operations and solvent cleaning operations will be reduced with implementation of the revised rule.

Contact Person:

Donald R. Price Ventura County Air Pollu tion Control District Telephone: (805) 645-1407

Michael Villegas

Air Pollution Control Officer
Case No. 6,658.

#### Ex parte GRAHAM.

[See Case No. 5,657.]
EXHIBIT 99.1

                    AMTECH SYSTEMS, INC. AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES

                            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 on Form 10-K of Amtech Systems, Inc. (the
"Company") for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jong S.
Whang, President and 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 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 result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Jong S. Whang
-------------------------------------
Jong S. Whang
President and Chief Executive Officer
February 11, 2003
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                     [RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P. LETTERHEAD]

                      CONSENT OF RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.



     We consent to the use on the Form 10-K of Sterling Gas Drilling Fund 1983-1
of our reserve report and all schedules, exhibits, and attachments thereto
incorporated by reference of Form 10-K and to any reference made to us on Form
10-K as a result of such incorporation.


                                                   Very truly yours,

                                                   /s/ RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.
                                                   RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.



Denver, Colorado
March 20, 2000
#### F. W. Woolworth Co. *v.*United States

No. 8129.

Entry No. 7939, etc.

(Decided June 12, 1952)

*Sharretts, Hillis & Paley (Howard C. Carter*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*Charles J. Wagner,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Johnson, 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:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between counsel for the plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, that the market value or the price, at the time of exportation to the United States of the earthenware articles covered by the Appeals to Reappraisement enumerated on schedule *“A”*hereto attached and made part hereof, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, plus the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed, ready for shipment to the United States, was in each instance the appraised value less the amount added to meet advances made by the Appraiser in similar cases and that there is no higher foreign value. '

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, that these appeals to reappraisement be submitted on this stipulation.

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 earthenware articles here involved, and that such value in each instance was the appraised value, less the amount added to meet advances made by the appraiser in similar cases.

Insofar as the appeals relate to all other merchandise they are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will he entered accordingly.
#### Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. *v.*United States

No. 6610.

Entry No. 761450, etc.

Invoices dated Stoke on Trent, England, March 4, 1941, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., May 12, 1941, etc.

(Decided December 12, 1946)

*John D. Rode*for the plaintiff.

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

*478Keefe, 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 yalues, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
Data on this page extracted on August 2, 2012 at 10:32:59

AQMIS web pages were recently revised. Please report any problems to aqmis@arb.ca.gov

Data after 2 0 1 0 m ay be prelim inary

AQMI S data are in PST

Sutter Buttes-S Butte

Daily Max 8 Hr Overlapping Avg Ozone - Natl Data

2012 

Parts Per Million ( ppm )

Day Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

1 0.055 0.059 0.031 0.065 

2 0.048 0.043 0.062 

3 0.043 0.043 0.057 

4 0.046 0.036 0.056 

5 0.052 0.041 0.044 

6 0.053 0.050 0.058 

7 0.059 0.045 0.059 

8 0.064 0.050 0.065 

9 0.062 0.039 0.076 

10 0.055 0.044 0.080 

11 0.061 0.056 0.080 

12 0.061 0.049 0.077 

13 0.055 0.056 0.052 

14 0.048 0.053 0.062 

15 0.065 0.049 0.058 

16 0.061 0.047 0.042 

17 0.055 0.055 0.036 

18 0.066 0.054 0.055 

19 0.066 0.054 0.054 

20 0.057 0.061 0.054 

21 0.048 0.059 

22 0.054 0.029 0.057 

23 0.049 0.052 0.034 0.054 

24 0.036 0.051 0.041 0.057 

25 0.032 0.042 0.033 0.064 

26 0.044 0.043 0.043 0.055 

27 0.046 0.046 0.048 0.060 

28 0.044 0.052 0.043 0.062 

29 0.052 0.039 

30 0.052 0.032 

31 0.068 0.064 

MAX: 0.054 0.068 0.061 0.080 0.065 

MIN: 0.032 0.042 0.029 0.031 0.062 

Download Data: Quick or Select Format

Historical 8-Hr avg. data are based on nat'l 

method and may not be comparable to State 

Std.

About ARB | Calendars | A-Z Index | Contact Us

Search ARB

Google Advanced

A | A| A

Page 1 of 2

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=OZONE&units=007&year=2012&report... 8/2/2012
Back to Top | All ARB Contacts | A-Z Index

Decisions Pending and Opportunities for Public Participation

Conditions of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility

How to Request Public Records

The Board is one of five boards, departments, and offices under

the umbrella of the California Environmental Protection Agency.

Cal/EPA | ARB | DPR | DTSC | OEHHA | SWRCB

Cell color is red if national 8-hour standard 

level is exceeded.

Blank values indicate data not available.

Click on name of monitoring site to see 

additional information on the site.

Click on daily value to see hourly data for 

the day.

Air Quality and Meteorological Information (AQMIS2) Home Page 

Latest Ozone Air Quality | Latest Week's Ozone | Recent Years' Ozone Air Quality

Air Quality Data | Meteorological Data | Google Map Pages | AQ Map

ShareThis

Page 2 of 2

http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/display.php?param=OZONE&units=007&year=2012&report... 8/2/2012