alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Buckfield Branch Railroad Company, *in Error, versus*Samuel P. Benson.

The general appearance of an attorney, without seasonable objection, is a waiver of any defect or want of service of the writ.

Notes filed in a case constitute no part of the record, and although not corresponding with those described in the declaration, cannot be regarded as error.

The facts in this case were agreed by the parties, and appear in the opinion of the court. The action is brought to reverse a judgment recovered in 1851 against the present plaintiffs.

*T. Ludden,*counsel for the plaintiffs.

*J. O’Donnell*and *Bradbury & Morrill,*counsel for the defendant.

Cutting, J.

So far as we can ascertain from the arguments of counsel, not having been furnished with a copy of the errors assigned, the plaintiff in error seeks to reverse the original judgment for certain defects apparent upon the record, from which it appears that the writ was issued on the twelfth day of May, 1851, and entered in court, and judgment rendered upon a default, on the thirteenth day of the same month. It further appears that Mr. Parris, purporting to act as the president and attorney of the company, acknowledged service of the writ by his endorsement thereon, and thereby “waived all objections to service by a competent and proper officer,” and further of record that he appeared and answered to the action.

To say nothing respecting the impropriety of the party by himself or his attorney acknowledging service of a writ, as has sometimes been practiced, we think that the general appearance of the attorney without seasonable objection to the legal pendency of the process, was a sufficient waiver of *375any defect or want of a sufficient service. Maine Bank v. Hervey, 21 Maine R., 45, and cases cited. If such appearance should be unauthorized or fraudulent, the guilty party might be liable to respond in damages, and the injured party would be entitled to his writ of review. But such an act cannot be assigned as an error in law to contradict or impeach the validity of the record, for otherwise a suit might become interminable.

Another error assigned and relied upon is, that the notes filed in the case do not correspond in every particular with those described in the declaration. And on inspection, it does appear that the note of May 12, 1851, for $38,73 was not legally negotiable, although alleged to be such, and transferred to the original plaintiff. But this court, in another case, when considering this very question with reference to these same notes, upon the authority of Storer v. White, 7 Mass., 448, and Pierce v. Adams, 8 Mass., 383, have settled *that, “*the notes or other proof used as evidence in ascertaining damages, constitute no part of the record, and cannot be regarded in case error should be brought to reverse the judgment in which they were offered.” Came v. Brigham, 39 Maine R., 38.

The other errors assigned are of less magnitude, and if of any importance, come within the principle already considered. The judgment must therefore be affirmed, with costs for the defendant in error.
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1)
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of American Spectrum Realty, Inc.;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 officer 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 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 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; andc)
    
    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;
 5)
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions);
 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;
andb)
    
    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.
  By:
    /s/ William J. CardenWilliam J. CardenChief Executive Officer
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 17-1532

___________________________

Gauriben Jaydevbhai Patel

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General of the United States

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

 Submitted: January 10, 2018

 Filed: January 22, 2018

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, BEAM, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Gauriben Jaydevbhai Patel, a citizen of India, petitions for review of an order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the decision
of an immigration judge (IJ) that denied her asylum and withholding of removal.

1

Patel sought immigration relief based on membership in the Patidar caste. While the

IJ and BIA found Patel credible, each held that she failed to establish that the alleged

harm she experienced rose to the level of persecution required to obtain relief, and

she failed to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution in India.

After careful consideration, we conclude thatsubstantial evidence supportsthe

BIA's finding that Patel failed to show past persecution in India, or a well-founded

fear of future persecution there, due to her membership in the Patidar caste. 8 U.S.C.

§ 1158(b)(1); Wondmneh v. Ashcroft, 361 F.3d 1096, 1097-98 (8th Cir. 2004)

(standard of review). The unfortunate incidents described by Patel, that resulted in

(among other things) a minor injury and unfulfilled threats of violence, and the fact

that her family (including her sisters) remain unharmed in India are key

considerations in this conclusion. See Tawm v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 740, 742-43 (8th

Cir. 2004) (no past persecution where applicant twice was detained and beaten and

sought medical treatment, and fear of future persecution was not well-founded or

reasonable, in part, because alien's family continued to live in Lebanon without

incident). Patel fails to present facts "'so compelling that no reasonable factfinder

could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.'" Melecio-Saquil v. Ashcroft, 337

F.3d 983, 986 (8th Cir. 2003) (quoting INS v. Elias–Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84

(1992)). And, having failed to establish her eligibility for asylum, Patel necessarily

cannot satisfy the more rigorous standard for withholding of removal. Wondmneh,

361 F.3d at 1099 ("The standard for withholding removal, a clear probability of

persecution, is more burdensome than a request for asylum."). 

Accordingly, the petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

The IJ's denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture is not before 1

this court because the BIA held the issue was not adequately raised on appeal and

thus did not rule on the matter. See Doe v. Holder, 651 F.3d 824, 830 (8th Cir. 2011)

(holding that we generally may not consider issues not raised before the BIA). 

-2-
China

Russia

Mongolia

North

Korea

South

Korea

Japan

Sakhalin

Lake

Baikal

Sea of

Okhotsk

Sea of

Japan

Perevoznaya Bay

Yellow

Sea

East China

Sea

Philippine

Sea

Kazakhstan

Boundary representation is

not necessarily authoritative.

Demarcation

Line

East Siberia

Sakhalin 

(Far East)

Amur

West Siberia

Kovykta

gasfield

Possible spur

to China

Pipeline

under

construction

Pipeline

under

construction

Pipeline

under

construction

DI Cartography Center/MPG 769943AI (G00132) 6-05

Selected Oil Pipelines to China

0 250 500 Miles

0 250 500 Kilometers

Beijing

Angarsk

Tayshet

Harbin

Daqing

Chita

Novosibirsk

Khabarovsk Khabarovsk habarovsk

Tynda

Omsk

Surgut

Karamay

Dushanzi

Urumqi

Yakutsk

Komsomol’sk

Okha

Skovorodino

Tomsk

Pavlodar

Oil pipeline

Proposed oil pipeline

Producing oil and gas region

Prospective oil and gas region
# Federal Aviation Administration

RGL Home **Advisory Circular****Advisory Circular Information****Advisory Circular Information**** ****AC Number:**AC 60-22**Date:**12/13/1991** ****Change Description:**** ****Subject:**Aeronautical Decision Making** ****Related Regulation(s):**Part 61, Part 91, Part 121, Part 125, Part 133, Part 135, Part 141**Section Number(s):**Unknown Section** ****Cancels:****Initiating Office:**AFS-800** ****Advisory Circular in PDF Format:**** ****Comments****Comments**
Comments:
FAA.gov Home |			Privacy Policy |			Web Policies & Notices |			Contact Us |			Help

**Readers & Viewers:**PDF Reader | MS Word Viewer | MS PowerPoint Viewer | MS Excel Viewer | Zip
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 23



                        Consent of Independent Auditors


The Board of Directors and Shareholders
Planar Systems, Inc. and Subsidiaries:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Nos.
33-82696, 33-82688, 33-90258 and 333-45191) on Form S-8 of Planar Systems, Inc.
and subsidiaries of our report dated November 3, 1999, except as to note 15,
which is as of December 13, 1999, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Planar Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries as of September 24, 1999 and September 25,
1998, and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders'
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
September 24, 1999, which report appears in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Planar Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended September 24, 1999.


/s/ KPMG LLP
----------------------
Portland, Oregon
December 21, 1999
**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 connectionwith the Annual Report of Savient Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Alan Rubinfield,Acting Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

 

(1)           The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | By:    | Alan Rubinfeld |                                         |
|--------|--------|----------------|----------------------------------------------|
|   |   |           | Alan Rubinfeld                               |
|   |   |           | Acting Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |
|   |   |           | March 12, 2004                               |
|        |        |                |                                              |  |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to Savient Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by SavientPharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 156 (Wednesday, August 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 43322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21317]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-3300-000]


Idaho Power Company; Notice of Filing

August 7, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 4, 1997, Idaho Power Company tendered 
for filing an amendment in the above-referenced docket.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such 
motions or protests should be filed on or before August 20, 1997. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-21317 Filed 8-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 148 (Friday, August 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41400-41401]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20326]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Notice of 
Meeting of National Advisory Environmental Health Sciences Council

    Pursuant to Pub. L. 92-463, notice is hereby given of the meeting 
of the National Advisory Environmental Health Sciences Council, 
September 15-16, 1997, Building 101 Conference Room, South Campus, 
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
    This meeting will be open to the public from 9:00 a.m. to 
approximately 3:45 p.m. on September 15 for the report of the Director, 
NIEHS, and for discussion of the NIEHS budget, program policies and 
issues, recent legislation, and other items of interest. Attendance by 
the public will be limited to space available.
    In accordance with the provisions set forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 
552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C. and sec. 10(d) of Pub. L. 92-463, the 
meeting will be closed to the public from approximately 3:45 p.m. on 
September 15 to adjournment on September 16, for the review, 
discussion, and evaluation of individual grant applications. These 
applications and the discussions 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.
    Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as 
sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should 
contact the Executive Secretary in advance of the meeting.
    Dr. Anne Sassaman, Director, Division of Extramural Research and 
Training,

[[Page 41401]]

and Executive Secretary, National Advisory Environmental Health 
Sciences Council, NIEHS, P.O. Box 12233, Research Triangle Park, North 
Carolina 27709, (919) 541-7723, will furnish substantive program 
information.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos 93.113, 
Biological Response to Environmental Agents; 93.114, Applied 
Toxicological Research and Testing: 93.115, Biometry and Risk 
Estimation; 93.894, Resource and Manpower Development, National 
Institutes of Health)

    Dated: July 29, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-20326 Filed 7-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
EXHIBIT 99.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF THE PRESIDENT

                 PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

                        AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

            SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

    I, Ramon Chimelis, president, treasurer, and secretary, certify that
the forgoing quarterly report on Form 10-QSB containing the financial
statements set forth within fully comply 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 that information contained in the quarterly report
presents fairly, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Big Sky Industries VII, Inc.


Date: May 20, 2003                   /s/ Ramon Chimelis
                                     -----------------------------
                                     Ramon Chimelis
                                     President
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2377 

To provide to the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service of the Department of Agriculture expedited authority to remove 

geese that threaten aircraft. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2012 

Mrs. GILLIBRAND introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To provide to the Administrator of the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service of the Department of Agriculture expedited authority to remove geese that threaten 

aircraft. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CANADA GEESE REMOVAL. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—On a determination by the Fed5 eral Aviation Administration that the population of Can6 ada geese residing on land under the jurisdiction of the 

7 National Park Service that is located within 5 miles of 

8 any commercial airport poses a risk to flight safety, the 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2377 IS

1 Secretary of Agriculture shall direct the Administrator of 

2 the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, in con3 sultation with the Secretary of the Interior and the Ad4 ministrator of the Federal Aviation Administration— 

5 (1) not later than 90 days after the date of the 

6 determination, to publish a management plan that 

7 provides for the removal, by not later than the first 

8 subsequent molting period for Canada geese that oc9 curs after the date of publication, of all Canada 

10 geese residing on the applicable land; and 

11 (2) as soon as practicable after the date of pub12 lication of the management plan under paragraph 

13 (1), to commence removal of Canada geese from the 

14 applicable land. 

15 (b) JFK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.—Not later than 

16 June 1, 2012, the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through 

17 the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspec18 tion Service, shall— 

19 (1) issue a record of decision for the document 

20 entitled ‘‘Supplement to the Environmental Impact 

21 Statement Bird Hazard Reduction Program: John 

22 F. Kennedy International Airport’’; and 

23 (2) commence consultation with the Secretary 

24 of the Interior to complete the collection and re25 moval of Canada geese from the applicable National 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2377 IS

1 Park Service land to ensure that the removal is com2 pleted by not later than August 1, 2012. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Jagged Peak, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify
that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 27, 2009, (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                  |  |                        
|----------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 7, 2009
|                  | 
|By:               |  | /s/ Andrew J. Norstrud 
|                  |  | Chief Financial Officer
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2394 

To suspend temporarily the duty on capsicum extracted oleoresin. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2012 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on capsicum extracted 

oleoresin. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CAPSICUM EXTRACTED OLEORESIN. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Capsicum extracted oleoresin 

(CAS No. 8023–77–6) (provided for in subheading 

3301.90.10) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2394 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Sybron Dental Specialties, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Gregory D. Waller, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

    (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 results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Gregory D. Waller

Gregory D. Waller
Chief Financial Officer
February 14, 2003