alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNIVERSAL TRADING AND

INVESTMENT CO.,

Plaintiff and Judgment

Creditor,

 v.

DUGSBERY INC., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 08-03632 CRB

ORDER LIFTING STAY AND

RETURNING MATTER TO ACTIVE

STATUS

I. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

On August 4, 2010, Plaintiff and Judgment Creditor Universal Trading and

Investment Company filed a Motion for “Administrative Relief” pursuant to Local Rule 7-11

to have the stay in this matter lifted because the Court’s reason for imposing the stay – the

pendency of a related action in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

(Case No. 06-cv-80086) – is no longer present. (Dkt. 93.) 

Defendants Lazarenko, Dugbery, Inc., and Lady Lake Investment Corp. oppose the

Motion on the ground that it should have been filed as a substantive motion pursuant to Local

Rule 7-2. Specifically, Defendants argue that (1) there has been an unreasonable delay of

eight months between the end of the related case on appeal and the filing of the instant

Motion to lift the stay and (2) they should have the opportunity to fully brief the possible

applicability of Federal Rule 41(b).

Case 3:08-cv-03632-CRB Document 95 Filed 08/13/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

G:\CRBALL\2008\3632\Order Lifting Stay.wpd 2

Defendants’ arguments against lifting the stay are not well taken. They do not dispute

that the reason for the stay is no longer present, and their concerns about Plaintiff’s delay in

re-starting this matter did not cause them to move for dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(b) as an

affirmative matter. Moreover, the stay has been lifted twice at the behest of Plaintiff since

the 9th Circuit mandate issued on December 2, 2009 for the purpose of dismissing specific

Defendants. Remaining Defendants had no reason to believe Plaintiff had entirely

abandoned his case, and the delay is not so long as to cause them to be unduly prejudiced by

the recommencement of the action.

II. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion for Administrative Relief (Dkt. 93) is GRANTED, the

stay is lifted, and this matter is now ACTIVE. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 13, 2010 

CHARLES R. BREYER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-03632-CRB Document 95 Filed 08/13/10 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         141,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               41,112,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 21,944,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            76,289,000
<PP&E>                                     265,894,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              14,293,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             572,527,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       82,654,000
<BONDS>                                    175,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,162,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  57,793,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               572,527,000
<SALES>                                    246,736,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           246,736,000
<CGS>                                      216,507,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              236,629,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (1,488,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          17,367,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,772,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (922,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,850,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0

</TABLE>
### §3735. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3735 was editorially reclassified as section 10134 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.

#### Prior Provisions

Prior sections 3735 to 3739 were omitted in the general amendment of title I of Pub. L. 90–351 by Pub. L. 96–157.

Section 3735, Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §305, June 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 202; Pub. L. 91–644, title I, §4(7), Jan. 2, 1971, 84 Stat. 1883; Pub. L. 93–83, §2, Aug. 6, 1973, 87 Stat. 203, related to reallocation of funds.

Section 3736, Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §306, June 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 202; Pub. L. 91–644, title I, §4(8), Jan. 2, 1971, 84 Stat. 1883; Pub. L. 93–83, §2, Aug. 6, 1973, 87 Stat. 203; Pub. L. 94–503, title I, §113, Oct. 15, 1976, 90 Stat. 2415, related to allocation of funds.

Section 3737, Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §307, June 19, 1968, 82 Stat. 202; Pub. L. 93–83, §2, Aug. 6, 1973, 87 Stat. 204; Pub. L. 94–503, title I, §114, Oct. 15, 1976, 90 Stat. 2415, related to priority programs and projects.

Section 3738, Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §308, as added Pub. L. 93–83, §2, Aug. 6, 1973, 87 Stat. 204; amended Pub. L. 94–503, title I, §115, Oct. 15, 1976, 90 Stat. 2415, related to Administration action upon State plans within prescribed time after date of submission.

Section 3739, Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §309, as added Pub. L. 94–503, title I, §116, Oct. 15, 1976, 90 Stat. 2415, related to assistance and grants to aid State antitrust enforcement.
#### §§ 1103.131-1103.139 [Reserved]
#### Louis Ponticelli, Respondent, v San Remo Civic Association, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendant.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendant San Remo Civic Association, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated August 12, 1976, which denied its motion for summary judgment. The action having proceeded to trial, the appeal from the order denying a motion for summary judgment is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham and Damiani, JJ., concur.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 06-613 

________________________________________________________________________ 

PEACE CORPS 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and MEXICO 

Signed at Mexico City June 13, 2006 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
MEXICO 

Peace Corps 

 Agreement signed at Mexico City June 13, 2006; 

 Entered into force June 13, 2006.
#### New York State Division of Human Rights, Appellant, v Oceanside Cove II Apartment Corporation, Respondent.

[835 NYS2d 246]

In an action, inter alia, pursuant to Executive Law § 297 (9) to recover damages for housing discrimination, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCarty, J.), dated March 24, 2006, as denied its application to extend the time for service of the summons and complaint pursuant to CPLR 306-b.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs, as no appeal lies as of right from an order that does not decide a motion *609made on notice *(see*CPLR 5701 [a] [2]), and leave to appeal has not been granted *(see*CPLR 5701 [c]).

The plaintiff, having conceded the impropriety of its service of the summons and complaint, was relegated to seeking an extension of the time to effect service under CPLR 306-b. Rather than making a motion for this relief, the plaintiff, in opposing the defendant’s cross motion, inter alia, to dismiss for lack of in personam jurisdiction, merely asked for this extension and argued why it should be granted. This constituted a violation of CPLR 2215, as amended *(see Khaolaead v Leisure Video,*18 AD3d 820, 821 [2005]; *Hergerton v Hergerton,*235 AD2d 395, 396 [1997]; *Thomas v Drifters,*219 AD2d 639, 640 [1995]; *Matter of Barquet v Rojas-Castillo,*216 AD2d 463 [1995]; *Matter of Briger,*95 AD2d 887, 888 [1983]; Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C2215:l; Siegel, NY Prac § 249, at 423 [4th ed]). Since the plaintiff merely requested this relief in its opposition papers, and did not make a motion on notice as defined in CPLR 2211, the plaintiff is not entitled to appeal as of right from the order denying its request to extend the time for service of the summons and complaint *(see*CPLR 5701 [a] [2]; *Thompson v 76 Corp.,*37 AD3d 450 [2007]; Siegel, NY Prac § 526, at 897 [4th ed]). Crane, J.P., Krausman, Covello and Carni, JJ., concur.
### §291j–2. Allocation among States

#### (a) Allotment regulations

For each fiscal year, the total amount of principal of loans to nonprofit private agencies which may be guaranteed or loans to public agencies which may be directly made under this part shall be allotted by the Secretary among the States, in accordance with regulations, on the basis of each State's relative population, financial need, need for construction of the facilities referred to in section 291j–1(a) of this title, and need for modernization of such facilities.

#### (b) Reallotment

Any amount allotted under subsection (a) to a State for a fiscal year ending before July 1, 1973, and remaining unobligated at the end of such year shall remain available to such State, for the purpose for which made, for the next two fiscal years (and for such years only), and any such amount shall be in addition to the amounts allotted to such State for such purpose for each of such next two fiscal years; except that, with the consent of any such State, any such amount remaining unobligated at the end of the first of such next fiscal year may be reallotted (on such basis as the Secretary deems equitable and consistent with the purposes of this subchapter) to other States which have need therefor. Any amounts so reallotted to a State shall be available for the purposes for which made until the close of the second such next two fiscal years and shall be in addition to the amount allotted and available to such State for the same period.

#### (c) Time of availability of amounts for subsequent allotment

Any amount allotted or reallotted to a State under this section for a fiscal year shall not, until the expiration of the period during which it is available for obligation, be considered as available for allotment for a subsequent fiscal year.

#### (d) Modernization or construction commenced on or after January 1, 1968

The allotments of any State under subsection (a) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1971, and the succeeding fiscal year shall also be available to guarantee loans with respect to any project, for modernization or construction of a nonprofit private hospital or other health facility referred to in section 291j–1(a)(1) of this title, if the modernization or construction of such facility was not commenced earlier than January 1, 1968, and if the State certifies and the Secretary finds that without such guaranteed loan such facility could not be completed and begin to operate or could not continue to operate, but with such guaranteed loan would be able to do so: Provided, That this subsection shall not apply to more than two projects in any one State.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title VI, §622, as added Pub. L. 91–296, title II, §201, June 30, 1970, 84 Stat. 345.)
### §5058. Eligibility for other benefits

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no payment for supportive services or reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses made to persons serving pursuant to subchapter II of this chapter shall be subject to any tax or charge or be treated as wages or compensation for the purposes of unemployment, temporary disability, retirement, public assistance, workers' compensation, or similar benefit payments, or minimum wage laws. This section shall become effective with respect to all payments made after October 1, 1973.

(Pub. L. 93–113, title IV, §418, Oct. 1, 1973, 87 Stat. 413; Pub. L. 96–143, §18(a)(2), Dec. 13, 1979, 93 Stat. 1083; Pub. L. 98–288, §24, May 21, 1984, 98 Stat. 196.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1984—Pub. L. 98–288 inserted "workers' compensation," after "public assistance,".

1979—Pub. L. 96–143 substituted "subchapter II of this chapter" for "subchapters II and III of this chapter".
#### § 92.15 Signing notarial certificate.

The notarizing officer should sign a notarial certificate on the lower right-hand side. The name and full official title of the notarizing officer should by typed, stamped with a rubber stamp, or printed in ink on two separate lines immediately below his signature. When the notarizing officer is assigned to a Foreign Service post in both a diplomatic and consular capacity, he should use his consular title in the notarial certificate. (See § 92.7.)

[22 FR 10858, Dec. 27, 1957, as amended at 60 FR 51723, Oct. 3, 1995]
§ 72.12 Bank deposits in foreign countries. ( a ) A consular officer is not authorized to withdraw or otherwise dispose of bank accounts and other assets deposited in financial institutions left by a deceased United States citizen or non-citizen national in a foreign country. Such deposits or other assets are not considered part of the personal estate of a decedent.
( b ) The consular officer should report the existence of bank accounts and other assets deposited in financial institutions of which the officer becomes aware to the legal representative, if any. The consular officer should inform the legal representative of the procedures required by local law and the financial institution to withdraw such deposits, and should provide a list of local attorneys in the event counsel is necessary to assist in withdrawing the funds.
( c ) A consular officer must not under any circumstances withdraw funds left by a deceased United States citizen or non-citizen national in a bank or financial institution in a foreign country without express approval and specific instructions from the Department.
### §5780a. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 5780a was editorially reclassified as section 11298 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
#### The People of the State of New York v. Caswell Lathan, Jr.

Motion by Salvatore M. George, Esq., Leon H. Murray, Esq., and James Moraban, Esq., for an order relieving them from prosecuting the appeal herein granted, and Murray A. Gordon, Esq., of 401 Broadway, New York, New York, is hereby assigned as counsel for the appellant for the purposes of the appeal.

Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens and Eager, JJ.:
### §300b–17. Report by Secretary

#### (1) In general

The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall—

(A) not later than 1 year after December 18, 2014, submit to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a report on activities related to—

(i) newborn screening; and

(ii) screening children who have or are at risk for heritable disorders; and

(B) not less than every 2 years, submit to such committees an updated version of such report.

#### (2) Contents

The report submitted under this section shall contain a description of—

(A) the ongoing activities under sections 300b–8, 300b–9, and 300b–11 through 300b–14 of this title; and

(B) the amounts expended on such activities.

(Pub. L. 113–240, §11(b), Dec. 18, 2014, 128 Stat. 2856.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Newborn Screening Saves Lives Reauthorization Act of 2014, and not as part of the Public Health Service Act which comprises this chapter.

#### Prior Provisions

Prior sections 300c to 300c–4 were repealed by Pub. L. 94–278, title IV, §403(a), Apr. 22, 1976, 90 Stat. 407.

Section 300c, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XI, §1111, as added Aug. 29, 1972, Pub. L. 92–414, §3, 86 Stat. 650, authorized Secretary to make grants and enter contracts with public and private entities for establishment of screening, treatment, and counseling programs with respect to Cooley's Anemia.

Section 300c–1, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XI, §1112, as added Aug. 29, 1972, Pub. L. 92–414, §3, 86 Stat. 651, required that any participation by an individual in any Cooley's Anemia programs should be on a purely voluntary basis.

Section 300c–2, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XI, §1113, as added Aug. 29, 1972, Pub. L. 92–414, §3, 86 Stat. 651, provided for making of grant upon application to Secretary and listed certain requirements to be met by applicant.

Section 300c–3, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XI, §1114, as added Aug. 29, 1972, Pub. L. 92–414, §3, 86 Stat. 652, authorized Secretary to establish a program with Public Health Service to provide for screening, counseling, and treatment with respect to Cooley's Anemia.

Section 300c–4, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XI, §1115, as added Aug. 29, 1972, Pub. L. 92–414, §3, 86 Stat. 652, provided for Secretary's submission of a report to President for transmittal to Congress annually.
#### § 288.3 Reports with respect to proposed distribution of primary obligations.

The Bank shall file with the Commission, on or prior to the date on which it sells any of its primary obligations in connection with a distribution of such obligations in the United States, a report containing the information and documents specified in Schedule A (17 CFR 288.101). The term “sell' as used in this section and in Schedule A means the making of a completed sale or a firm commitment to sell.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James Romano and Another, Appellants.

Judgment of conviction and order affirmed. All concur.
Department of Homeland Security 

Office of Inspector General

 DHS Has Made Improvements on the 


Security Program For Its Intelligence 


Systems 


(Unclassified Summary) 


OIG-11-24 January 2011 
Office of Inspector General 


DHS Has Made Improvements on the Security Program For Its Intelligence Systems
 

OIG-11-24
 

We reviewed the Department of Homeland Security’s enterprise-wide security program 

and practices for its Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information intelligence 

systems. Pursuant to Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002, we 

reviewed the department’s security management, implementation, and evaluation of its 

intelligence activities, including its policies, procedures, and system security controls for 

enterprise-wide intelligence systems. In doing so, we assessed the department’s Plan of 

Action and Milestones, certification and accreditation, and incident reporting processes, 

as well as its security training and awareness program. 

The department continues to maintain an effective enterprise-wide information security 

management program for its intelligence systems. Overall, information security 

procedures have been documented and adequate security controls have been 

implemented. Nonetheless, management oversight and operational issues remain 

regarding the effectiveness of the program. We have concerns with the documentation 

for the Coast Guard Intelligence Support System certification and accreditation package 

and the information system security training and awareness program for intelligence 

personnel. Also, we identified security issues with the Classified Local Area Network 

and Coast Guard Intelligence Support System. We recommended that the Under 

Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis address the open recommendations identified 

during our review. The department concurred with all four recommendations. (OIG-11­

XX, January 2011, ITA) 

1
 
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COPIES 

To obtain additional copies of this report, please call the Office of Inspector General (OIG) at (202) 254-4100, 

fax your request to (202) 254-4305, or visit the OIG web site at www.dhs.gov/oig. 

OIG HOTLINE 

To report alleged fraud, waste, abuse or mismanagement, or any other kind of criminal or noncriminal 

misconduct relative to department programs or operations: 

• Call our Hotline at 1-800-323-8603; 

• Fax the complaint directly to us at (202) 254-4292; 

• Email us at DHSOIGHOTLINE@dhs.gov; or 

• Write to us at: 

DHS Office of Inspector General/MAIL STOP 2600, 

Attention: Office of Investigations - Hotline, 

245 Murray Drive, SW, Building 410, 

Washington, DC 20528. 

The OIG seeks to protect the identity of each writer and caller.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, May 25, 2016. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, May 25, 2016 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A16D0371. JUDY HEIDI FLORES v. CHRISTINA LYNN GREENE et al. .
Upon consideration of the Application for Discretionary Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 15CV499
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Bollettieri, Appellant.

Judgment of conviction unanimously affirmed. (Appeal from judgment of Oneida Supreme Court convicting defendant of the crimes of violations of sections 1294 and 1864 of the Penal Law.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, MeClusky and Henry, JJ.