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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-1428

CHRISTIE B. TENUMAH; ARUISANTOBIONE TENUMAH;

O.R.T.; E.L.T.,

Petitioners,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration

Appeals. (A97-189-684; A97-189-685; A97-189-686; A97-189-687)

Submitted: December 14, 2005 Decided: December 30, 2005

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Liam Ge, Columbia, Maryland, for Petitioners. James Arthur Hunolt,

Bryan Stuart Beier, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Christie B. Tenumah and her three children, natives and

citizens of Nigeria, petition for review of an order of the Board

of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying their motion to reconsider

its previous order, which upheld the immigration judge’s denial of

their motion to reopen immigration proceedings. We have reviewed

the record and the Board’s order and find that the Board did not

abuse its discretion in denying the motion to reconsider. See 8

C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (2005). Accordingly, we deny the petition for

review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Tenumah,

No. A97-189-684(L) (B.I.A. Mar. 24, 2005). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
Set-Top Box Framework Meeting

Join us for a Webinar on January 26

Space is limited.

Reserve your Webinar seat now at:

https://www1.gotomeeting.com/register/683522624

Set-Top Box Framework Meeting

Title: Set-Top Box Framework Meeting

Date: Thursday, January 26, 2012

Time: 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST

After registering you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the Webinar.

System Requirements

PC-based attendees

Required: Windows® 7, Vista, XP or 2003 Server

Macintosh®-based attendees

Required: Mac OS® X 10.5 or newer
#### Jerry Douglas WOOD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. GG-357.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Jan. 25, 1978.

Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, Judith J. Dougherty, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., A. S. Johnston, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

MILLS, Judge.

The State filed an information charging Wood with willfully failing to appear for trial on felony charges contrary to Section 843.15(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1975). Wood pled guilty and was sentenced to five years in prison less 128 days time served. Wood now appeals and contends that he was confused as to whether he pled to a felony or a misdemeanor; that he was not permitted to consult with his attorney concerning his request to withdraw his guilty plea; that he was not granted additional time to present mitigating evidence prior to sentencing; • and that the allegations of the information were insufficient to support his adjudication of guilt. 0

Initially, Wood pled not guilty but later changed his plea to guilty. When this was done the trial court clearly informed *135Wood and his attorney that Wood was charged with a felony known as failure to appear at a court proceeding which was a felony of the third degree and punishable by a maximum sentence of five years. Wood stated that he had given his attorney sufficient information to enter the plea and that he agreed to the plea. Wood and his attorney understood he was pleading guilty to a felony.

It is clear from the record that Wood and his attorney understood that Wood was pleading guilty to a felony and that the attorney was close to trifling with the court when she asked for a moment to speak to her client about withdrawing his guilty plea when she had already had two months to do this.

Wood and his attorney had approximately two months to prepare his presentation of mitigating circumstances prior to sentencing but apparently did nothing. At the sentencing proceeding, the court properly denied Wood’s request for additional time.

The information alleged a violation contrary to Section 843.15(l)(b) when it should have alleged Section 843.15(l)(a). This is of no consequence however. The information charged Wood with a felony. The court informed him he was charged with a felony punishable as a third degree felony. Wood agreed to enter a plea of guilty to the felony charge. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.140(d)(1) provides that an error in a citation shall not be a ground for reversal of a conviction based thereon if the error did not mislead the defendant to his prejudice. There has been no showing that Wood was misled or prejudiced. *Tukes*v. *State,*346 So.2d 1056 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).

The judgment and sentence are affirmed.

McCORD, C. J., and BOYER, J., concur.
EXHIBIT 23.2

<PAGE>

                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Medco Research, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration  statement (No.
33-35675) on Form S-8 of Medco Research, Inc. and subsidiary of our report dated
January 28, 1997,  with respect to the  consolidated  statements of  operations,
stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 1996, which
report  appears in the  December  31, 1998  annual  report on Form 10-K of Medco
Research, Inc.

Our report dated January 28, 1997, contains an explanatory paragraph that states
that the Company is party to certain claims and litigation, which outcome cannot
presently be determined.  No provisions  for liability,  if any, that may result
from the  resolution of such matters have been  recognized  in the  accompanying
consolidated financial statements.

                                                KPMG  LLP

Raleigh, North Carolina
March 15,1999
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 22, 2022

NO. 03-21-00227-CV

Roger Borgelt, Mark Pulliam, Jay Wiley, and The State of Texas, Appellants

v.

Austin Firefighters Association, IAFF Local 975; City of Austin; and Spencer Cronk, in his 

Official Capacity as the City Manager of the City of Austin, Appellees

APPEAL FROM THE 419TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES BAKER, TRIANA, KELLY

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the trial court on March 24, 2021. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error 

in the trial court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment. The 

appellants shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
```

[110th Congress Public Law 367]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ367.110]

[[Page 122 STAT. 4026]]

Public Law 110-367
110th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To extend and reauthorize the Defense Production Act of 1950, and for 
         other purposes. <<NOTE: Oct. 8, 2008 -  [H.R. 6894]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Defense 
Production Act Extension and Reauthorization of 2008.>> 
SECTION 1. <<NOTE: 50 USC app. 2061 note.>> SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Defense Production Act Extension and 
Reauthorization of 2008''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF TERMINATION DATE.

    Section 717(a) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 
2166(a)) is amended by striking ``September 30, 2008'' and inserting 
``September 30, 2009''.
SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION.

    Section 711(b) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 
2161(b)) is amended by striking ``2008'' and inserting ``2009''.

    Approved October 8, 2008.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 6894:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008):
            Sept. 23, considered and passed House.
            Sept. 25, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### Douglas Charles SUTTON v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 50334.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

April 5, 1978.

McTeer, Walls, Bailey & Buck, Robert E. Buck, Greenville, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Wayne Snuggs, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., BROOM and BOWLING, JJ., and DARWIN MAPLES, Commissioner.

AFFIRMED.

SMITH and ROBERTSON, P. JJ., and SUGG, WALKER, LEE and COFER, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit
      23.0**








CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
      have
      issued our reports dated March 13, 2007, accompanying the consolidated financial
      statements and management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
      over financial reporting included in the Annual Report of United Financial
      Bancorp, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. We hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration
      Statement of United Financial Bancorp, Inc. on Form S-8
      (No. 333-138197, effective October 25, 2006).





/s/
      Grant
      Thornton LLP


Boston,
      Massachusetts


March
      13,
      2007
No. 99-1085.

#### Levan et al. *v.*Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2350 

To suspend temporarily the duty on diethylaminoethyl-dextran. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 25, 2012 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on diethylaminoethyldextran. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DIETHYLAMINOETHYL-DEXTRAN. 

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 Diethylaminoethyl-dextran 

(CAS No. 9015–73–0) (provided for in subheading 

3914.00.60) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2350 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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 160 (Tuesday, August 19, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 44130]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21836]



[[Page 44130]]

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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Notice of Proposals To Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or To Acquire Companies That Are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y, (12 CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company that engages either 
directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking 
activity that is listed in Sec.  225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) 
or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to 
banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise 
noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their 
views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the 
standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than September 3, 1997.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (A. Linwood Gill III, Assistant 
Vice President) 701 East Byrd Street, Richmond, Virginia 23261-4528:
    1. Barnett Banks, Inc., Jacksonville, Florida; BB&T Corporation, 
Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Central Fidelity Banks, Inc., Richmond, 
Virginia; Crestar Financial Corporation, Richmond, Virginia; First 
American Corporation, Nashville, Tennessee; First Citizens BancShares, 
Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina; First Union Corporation, Charlotte, 
North Carolina; First Virginia Banks, Inc., Falls Church, Virginia; 
Jefferson Bankshares, Inc., Charlottesville, Virginia; NationsBank 
Corporation, Charlotte, North Carolina; Riggs National Corporation, 
Washington, D.C.; Signet Banking Corporation, Richmond, Virginia; 
SunTrust Banks, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia; Synovus Financial Corporation, 
Columbus, Georgia; and Wachovia Corporation, Winston-Salem, North 
Carolina; to acquire, through HONOR Technologies, Inc., Maitland, 
Florida, Monetary Transfer System, L.L.C., St. Louis, Missouri, and 
thereby engage directly and indirectly in certain data processing and 
electronic funds transfer services, pursuant to Sec.  225.28(b)(14) of 
the Board's Regulation Y.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 13, 
1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-21836 Filed 8-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
Docket ID: FAA - 2015 - 2460 Dir ID: 2014 - NM - 163 - AD
Exhibit 23.1**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-88442,333-32869, 33-46735, 333-149035 and 33-46734 on Forms S-8 and Registration Statements Nos.333-68766, 333-119756, 333-121835, 333-121837 and 333-123403 on Forms S-3 of our report datedFebruary 28, 2008, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of TerraIndustries Inc. and subsidiaries (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes anexplanatory paragraph relating to the Company’s adoption of Statement of Financial AccountingStandard No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other PostretirementPlans,” relating to the recognition and related disclosure provisions, effective December 31, 2006)and our report dated February 28, 2008, relating to the effectiveness of Terra Industries Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting,appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Terra Industries Inc. and subsidiaries for the yearended December 31, 2007.
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 Big Sky Industries VI, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ramon Chimelis, President 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:





(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.



Dated: March 6, 2009



/s/ Ramon Chimelis

Ramon Chimelis, President

Big Sky Industries VI, Inc.
EXHIBIT 21

SUBSIDIARIES



|                                              |  |                                  
|--------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------
|Name                                          |  | Jurisdiction inwhich Incorporated
|HARTMARX CORPORATION (Registrant)             |  | Delaware                         
|Consolidated Apparel Group, Inc.              |  | Delaware                         
|Coppley Apparel Group Limited .               |  | Ontario, Canada                  
|Direct Route Marketing Corporation            |  | New Hampshire                    
|Hart Schaffner & Marx                         |  | New York                         
|HMX Sportswear, Inc.                          |  | New York                         
|National Clothing Company, Inc.               |  | New York                         
|Hickey-Freeman Co., Inc.                      |  | Delaware                         
|HMX Luxury, Inc.                              |  | New York                         
|International Womens Apparel, Inc.           |  | Texas                            
|Jaymar-Ruby, Inc. (d/b/a Trans-Apparel Group) |  | Indiana                          
|Anniston Sportswear Corporation               |  | Indiana                          
|Monarchy Group, Inc.                          |  | Delaware                         
|Simply Blue Apparel, Inc.                     |  | Delaware                         
|Sweater.com Apparel, Inc.                     |  | Delaware                         
|NYC Sweaters, Inc.                            |  | New York                         
|Universal Design Group, Ltd.                  |  | New York                         
|M. Wile & Company, Inc. (d/b/a HMX Tailored)  |  | New York                         
|Exclusively Misook Apparel division           |  |                                  
|Zooey Apparel, Inc.                           |  | Delaware                         

The names of 36 subsidiaries are omitted, as such subsidiaries, considered in the aggregate as a
single subsidiary, would not constitute a significant subsidiary. The Registrant owns, directly or indirectly, 100% of the voting securities of both the named and unnamed subsidiaries, except for one of the unnamed subsidiaries, which is owned 50.1%
by a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Registrant. All of the above subsidiaries (including unnamed subsidiaries) are included in the consolidated financial statements of the Registrant and its subsidiaries.
# Company sanitized

Does not contain Confidential Business

Information (CBI)

Appendix D



# Draft Facility Report on Product Content

## 2010/15 PFOA Stewardship Program



# Draft Facility Report on Product Content

I. CHEMICAL IDENTIFICATION

Identify the pr oduct (e.g fluoropolymer dispersion) for which you are submitting information:

Product name:

___ Fluorinated Surfactant (monomeric)

_______

Product description (including concentrations of perfluoroalkyl chemicals

identified in Section IV below and y ear of production):

All products under the name of “ Fluorinated Surfactant (monomeric) ” are

considered to be precursors to PFOA and higher homologues.

II. COMPANY IDENTIFICATION

Identify the company and location of the facility submitting infor mation:

Company name:

_ AGC SEIMI CHEMICAL CO.,LTD

Site location: 3

- 2

- 10,Chigasaki,Chigasaki City,Kanagawa,253

- 8585 Japan

: 2276

- 2,Nada,Hirai,Kashima City,Ibaraki,314

- 0012 Japan

Identify a company technical contact who can respond to inquiries about the information

submitted:

Technical contact:

_ Shunji Odaka

Phone:

_ +81

- 467

- 82

- 4398

____ Address: 3

- 2

- 10,Chigasaki,Chigasaki City,Kanagawa,253

- 8585 Japan

III. PRODUCTION

Calendar year for which you are reporting: Jan 1, 20 1 1 to Dec 31, 20 1 1

( Normalized data based on year end run rate.)

Provide the amount of the product for the reporting year at each specific site:

Imported

___ 0 ____kgs/yr

Manufactured

_ CBI

__ k gs/yr (As active ingredients)IV. PRODUCT CONTENT

A. CONCENTRATIONS OF RELEVANT PERFLUOROALKYL CHEMICALS

Please provide the concentrations (ppb) of various perfluoroalkyl chemicals in your product. For

chemicals for which you do not have actual data, p lease provide range estimates.

CBI

B. ANALYTICAL METHODS

Analyses should be conducted using the most accurate instrumentation and procedures available

as of the time of testing. Please provide detailed information on the methods used (including

analytical standards used, sampling, sample treatment, analysis), assumptions made, uncertainties

and detection limits (LOD, LOQ) for the data provided.

Active ingredients of the products and solvent/water compose commercial products.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       17501
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                 0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 126159
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             0
<LOANS>                                     378979
<ALLOWANCE>                                   4636
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              540850
<DEPOSITS>                                  460417
<SHORT-TERM>                                 38486
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           3539
<LONG-TERM>                                   1000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                      1457
<OTHER-SE>                                   35951
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              540850
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              28452
<INTEREST-INVEST>                             7850
<INTEREST-OTHER>                              1948
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             38250
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           16910
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           18809
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        19441
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  695
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             250
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              18373
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               5856
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    5856
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                   261
<EPS-BASIC>                                  .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .06
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                4.15
<LOANS-NON>                                   2685
<LOANS-PAST>                                   573
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               120
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                               3579
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                              4750
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  567
<RECOVERIES>                                   198
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                             4636
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                          4636
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                              0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        200


</TABLE>
#### United States *v.*Vita Food Products, Inc.

No. 5966.

Invoice dated Alexandria, Egypt, September 12, 1939.

Entered at New York, N. Y., September 22, 1939.

Entry No. 732456.

(Decided December 21, 1943)

*Paul P. Bao,*Assistant Attorney General *(Daniel I. Auster,*special attorney), for the plaintiff.

*Jordan & IClingaman*for the defendant.

Cole, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement of a shipment of pressed caviar, exported from Egypt and entered at the port of New York in September 1939, has been submitted for decision on a written stipulation, filed December 16, 1943, wherein the parties agree that the proper basis for appraisement is foreign value, as defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. § 1402 (c)), and that such value is 20 shillings per kilo, net, packed. .

On the stipulated facts, I hold foreign value to be the proper dutiable value of the merchandise in question, such value being as hereinabove set forth. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.