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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHARLES STEVENS,

Petitioner, 

 v.

RON DAVIS, Warden, San Quentin

State Prison

Respondent. /

No. C 09-0137 WHA

DEATH PENALTY CASE

ORDER GRANTING ATTORNEY

RIFKIN ACCESS TO SEALED

TRANSCRIPT

Good cause appearing, the stipulated request of Petitioners’ attorneys, including counsel

of record, and limited appointed counsel, for attorney Lori Rifkin to be authorized to access

sealed information regarding Petitioner’s desire to withdraw and waive certain of his federal

habeas claims, is GRANTED. Ms. Rifkin is hereby authorized to access the sealed transcript of

the ex parte hearing held by the Court with Petitioner and Petitioner’s Counsel on December 3,

2014, Dkt. No. 93.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 22 , 2015. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:09-cv-00137-WHA Document 99 Filed 01/22/15 Page 1 of 1
#### § 91.1 Answering inquiries regarding tariff acts and customs regulations.

In replying to inquiries received from exporters, travelers, or other interested parties, concerning tariff acts or customs regulations, consular officers shall refrain from giving, or appearing to give, decisions pertaining to matters upon which hey are not competent to pass.
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent,

v. BRETT ALLAN MARKER, Appellant. No. 73502-1-

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED: MAR 2 1 2016 Per Curiam. Brett Marker appeals from the trial court's order dismissing 

### his CrR 7.8 motion withprejudice and denying his motion to dismiss without 

### prejudice. The State ofWashington concedes thatdismissal with prejudice was error. We acceptthe State's concession, reverse the trial court's order, and remand for entry of an order dismissing Marker's CrR 7.8 motion without 

### prejudice. In light of ourdecision, Marker's statement ofadditional groundsfor review is moot. 

### Reversed and remanded for entry oforder dismissing the CrR 7.8 motion without prejudice. For the court: 

# V0,;m^' .-o t«e>

, —tcr er\ ?550 3C —t_i m J» _o vo o-ts ro

—• *Tjr 3>-OfT5 s» t/>rn,~< TX~ VO o
 —*C3 CO sr S<
Case3:09-cv-01241-WHA Document53 Filed08/19/10 Page1 of 2

STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING

Case 3:09-cv-01241-WHA Document 54 Filed 08/23/10 Page 1 of 2
Case3:09-cv-01241-WHA Document53 Filed08/19/10 Page2 of 2

August 23, 2010.

Case 3:09-cv-01241-WHA Document 54 Filed 08/23/10 Page 2 of 2
V 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 290

For the relief of Ahmad Khabaz Taghizadeh and Azammolok Taghizadeh 

Vatani. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 6, 2005

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

For the relief of Ahmad Khabaz Taghizadeh and Azammolok 

Taghizadeh Vatani.

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

3 SECTION 1. CITIZENSHIP FOR AHMAD KHABAZ 

4 TAGHIZADEH AND AZAMMOLOK TAGHIZADEH 

5 VATANI. 

6 Notwithstanding title III of the Immigration and Na7 tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), Ahmad Khabaz 

8 Taghizadeh and Azammolok Taghizadeh Vatani shall each 

9 be considered to be a naturalized citizen of the United 

10 States as of the date of the enactment of this Act and 
2

•HR 290 IH 

1 shall each be furnished by the Secretary of Homeland Se2 curity with a certificate of naturalization.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2922 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2922

       To suspend temporarily the duty on 4-chloro-benzonitrile.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 15, 2005

  Mr. Castle introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To suspend temporarily the duty on 4-chloro-benzonitrile.

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

SECTION 1. 4-CHLORO-BENZONITRILE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.09.09      4-chloro-           Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         benzonitrile (CAS                                                  31/2008
                         No. 623-03-0)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2926.90.14)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 1000.46 Do drug-free workplace requirements apply?

Yes. In addition to any tribal requirements, the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (41 U.S.C. 701, *et seq.*) and HUD's implementing regulations in 2 CFR part 2429 apply.

[76 FR 45168, July 28, 2011]
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

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO (CABN 44332)

United States Attorney

BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973)

Chief, Criminal Division

BARBARA BRENNAN SILANO (MASSBAR 055540)

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Ave., Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7223

Facsimile: (415) 436- 7234

E-mail: barbara.silano@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

GRAESON PRESCOTT,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 09-1135 MHP

[PROPOSED] SPEEDY TRIAL ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING the Court finds, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A), that

the ends of justice served by excluding time from February 3, 2010 and March 22, 2010

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The case involves

thousands of pages of documents which must be reviewed by the defense. Moreover, the Court

finds, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(B) that failure to grant such a continuance would deny

the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the

exercise of due diligence. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the time period between February 3, 2010 and

///

///

Case 3:09-cr-01135-CRB Document 20 Filed 02/18/10 Page 1 of 2
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

SPEEDY TRIAL ORDER 2

March 22, 2010 is excluded from calculations pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A) and B.

DATED:

_______________________________

HON. MARILYN HALL PATEL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

2/17/2010

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:09-cr-01135-CRB Document 20 Filed 02/18/10 Page 2 of 2
#### § 513.311 Investigation and referral.

Information concerning the existence of a cause for debarment from any source shall be promptly reported, investigated, and referred, when appropriate, to the debarring official for consideration. After consideration, the debarring official may issue a notice of proposed debarment.
Office of the Chief and Council

Kirk E Francis

Chief

Bill Thompson

Vice C

Wayne T Mitchell

Repwscnaltire

2014 January 23

Hon H Curtis Spalding

Regional Administrator

EPA New England Headquarters

5 Post Office Square Suite 100

Boston MA 021093912

Re Water Quality Standards in the Penobscot Indian Reservation

Dear Regional Administrator Spaulding

Penobscot Nation

12 Wabtmaki Way

Community Buildinr

Indian Island Maine 04468

207 S277776

FAX 207 8276042

I write in follow up to ongoing government to government consultations the EPA and the Penobscot

Nation have had in reference to the administration and operation of the Clean Water Act within the

Penobscot Indian Reservation We very much appreciate the respect you have shown for our views and

the spirit of President Obamas November 5 2009 Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments

and Agencies

This is to notify you that the Penobscot Nation is promulgating water quality standards for application

within the Penobscot Indian Reservation pursuant to sections 303 and 518e of the Clean Water Act 33

§§ 1313 I377e We expect to have these standards ready for public notice within the next

couple of months and we will be submitting them to your office for approval

Given this development we ask that you consult further with the Penobscot Nation to address issues

surrounding any competing authorities between the EPA the State and the Penobscot Nation with respect

to the promulgation of water quality standards within the Reservation

We greatly appreciate your consideration

Sincerely

Kirk Francis Chief

Penobscot Nation

cc Tribal Council Penobscot Nation

John Banks Natural Resources Director Penobscot Nation

Mark Chavarce Esq

Jill Elise Grant Esq

Kaighn Smith Jr Esq

EPA000527
§ 1000.103 How may IHBG funds be used for tenant-based or project-based rental assistance? ( a ) IHBG funds may be used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance.
( b ) IHBG funds may be used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance that is provided in a manner consistent with section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f).
( c ) IHBG funds used for project-based or tenant-based rental assistance must comply with the requirements of NAHASDA and this part.
[72 FR 59004, Oct. 18, 2007]
§ 203.356 Notice of foreclosure and pre-foreclosure sale; reasonable diligence requirements. ( a ) *Notice of foreclosure and pre-foreclosure sale.* The mortgagee must give notice to the Secretary, in a format prescribed by the Secretary, within 30 days after the institution of foreclosure proceedings. The mortgagee must give notice to the Secretary, in a format prescribed by the Secretary, within the time-frame prescribed by the Secretary, of the acceptance of any mortgagor into the pre-foreclosure sale procedure.
( b ) *Reasonable diligence.* The mortgagee must exercise reasonable diligence in prosecuting the foreclosure proceedings to completion and in acquiring title to and possession of the property. A time frame that is determined by the Secretary to constitute “reasonable diligence” for each State is made available to mortgagees.
[61 FR 36265, July 9, 1996]
Exhibit
(32b)








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Emergent Group Inc. (the “registrant”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “report”), I, William M. McKay,
Chief Financial Officer of the registrant, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





(1) The
report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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








May
      12, 2009/s/
            William M. McKayWilliam
      M. McKayChief
      Financial Officer
Fourth Amendment to the Hawker Beechcraft Savings and Investment Plan



  
 Exhibit 10.1

 FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE 
 HAWKER BEECHCRAFT SAVINGS AND INVESTMENT PLAN 
 This
Fourth Amendment to the Hawker Beechcraft Savings and Investment Plan is made this 27th day of September, 2010. 
 WHEREAS, Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (the
“Company”) maintains the Hawker Beechcraft Savings and Investment Plan (the “Plan”); and 
 WHEREAS,
the Company has reserved the right to amend the Plan. 
 NOW, THEREFORE in consideration of the foregoing premises,
effective October 4, 2010, Section 4.03 of the Plan is amended and restated to read as follows: 

Section 4.03. Employer Matching Contribution. Subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter provided, the
Employer will make a matching contribution for each eligible Participant (as defined in Article II) as follows: 

For each eligible participant who is covered under the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement the matching
contribution will be equal to 100% of the first 4% of Compensation contributed by such Participant as an elective before-tax or after-tax contribution pursuant to Section 4.04. 

For all other eligible participants the matching contribution will be equal to 50% of the first 4% of Compensation
contributed by such Participant as an elective before-tax or after-tax contribution pursuant to Section 4.04. 
 Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, no Participant will accrue or be entitled to any matching contribution hereunder unless and until such contribution is contributed to the Trust.

 The amount of the Employer Matching Contribution for each eligible Participant will be determined based on the
amount or percentage contributed as a salary reduction contribution for each pay period and not on the total percentage contributed throughout the year. 
 The amount of the Employer’s matching contribution made for each Participant pursuant to this Section 4.03 will be allocated to the Participant’s Matching Account. 

The Company reserves, by action of its governing body, the right to terminate, suspend, or modify contributions at any
time and from time to time. 

  
 1 








  
 IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the foregoing amendment is executed as of the day, month, and year first appearing above. 
  

					
	HAWKER BEECHCRAFT CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Sharad B. Jiwanlal

		 	Name:	 	Sharad B. Jiwanlal
		 	Title:	 	Vice President, Human Resources


  

	
	 ATTEST:

	
	 Cynthia L. Norman



  
 2
H. R. 2894

One Hundred Ninth Congress

of the

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and six 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 102 South 

Walters Avenue in Hodgenville, Kentucky, as the ‘‘Abraham Lincoln Birthplace 

Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

102 South Walters Avenue in Hodgenville, Kentucky, shall be 

known and designated as the ‘‘Abraham Lincoln Birthplace Post 

Office Building’’. 

SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, 

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Abraham 

Lincoln Birthplace Post Office Building’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### In the Matter of Joseph Miata, Petitioner, v H. Carl McCall, as State Comptroller, New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System, Respondent.

[715 NYS2d 496]

*591—Lahtinen, J.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which denied petitioner’s request for performance of duty disability retirement benefits.

Petitioner, a police officer with the Long Island State Parks and Recreation Commission, applied for performance of duty disability retirement benefits based upon a left ankle injury that he sustained while leaving work on August 24, 1995 when he tripped on a step and twisted his ankle. Following a hearing at which conflicting expert testimony was presented, respondent denied petitioner’s application based upon, a finding that petitioner was not permanently incapacitated from the performance of his duties. Petitioner thereafter commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the determination.

Initially, we reject petitioner’s assertion that the Hearing Officer abused his discretion in not permitting petitioner’s medical expert to demonstrate the range of motion in petitioner’s ankle *(see generally, Harvey v Mazal Am. Partners,*79 NY2d 218, 223-224). We find no reason to disturb the Hearing Officer’s determination that without medical expertise the demonstration would be meaningless and, in any event, the medical expert’s testimony was adequate to assess petitioner’s injury.

Contrary to petitioner’s contention, we cannot say that respondent’s determination is not supported by substantial evidence. Stuart Kandel, an orthopedic surgeon, testified that upon his examination of petitioner he concluded that there were no objective abnormalities inasmuch as he noted no swelling, limping, instability nor restriction of motion in comparison to his right ankle. Furthermore, although there were signal changes reflected in the MRI, there was no definitive evidence of a full tear in any part of the ankle. While Kandel diagnosed petitioner with a sprained ankle, he opined that petitioner was not incapacitated from the performance of his duties. To the extent that petitioner’s treating physician, who was certified in foot and ankle surgery, testified to the contrary, the differing opinions expressed by the medical experts presented a credibility issue for respondent to resolve *(see, Matter of Condo v McCall,*269 AD2d 676). We accordingly find no reason to disturb the determination, notwithstanding that the record could support a contrary conclusion *(see, Matter of Kesick v New York State & Local Employees’ Retirement Sys.,*257 AD2d 831).

Crew III, J. P., Spain, Carpinello and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2879 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2879

    To suspend temporarily the duty on P Tolulene Sulfonyl Chloride.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 14, 2005

  Mr. Chabot introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To suspend temporarily the duty on P Tolulene Sulfonyl Chloride.

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

SECTION 1. P TOLULENE SULFONYL CHLORIDE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.11.03      Benzenesulfonyl     Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Chloride, 4                                                        31/2008
                         Methyl (CAS No.
                         98-59-9)
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         2904.10.10)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
### §4852a. Task force on lead-based paint hazard reduction and financing

#### (a) In general

The Secretary, in consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall establish a task force to make recommendations on expanding resources and efforts to evaluate and reduce lead-based paint hazards in private housing.

#### (b) Membership

The task force shall include individuals representing the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Farmers Home Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Environmental Protection Agency, employee organizations in the building and construction trades industry, landlords, tenants, primary lending institutions, private mortgage insurers, single-family and multifamily real estate interests, nonprofit housing developers, property liability insurers, public housing agencies, low-income housing advocacy organizations, national, State and local lead-poisoning prevention advocates and experts, and community-based organizations located in areas with substantial rental housing.

#### (c) Responsibilities

The task force shall make recommendations to the Secretary and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency concerning—

(1) incorporating the need to finance lead-based paint hazard reduction into underwriting standards;

(2) developing new loan products and procedures for financing lead-based paint hazard evaluation and reduction activities;

(3) adjusting appraisal guidelines to address lead safety;

(4) incorporating risk assessments or inspections for lead-based paint as a routine procedure in the origination of new residential mortgages;

(5) revising guidelines, regulations, and educational pamphlets issued by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and other Federal agencies relating to lead-based paint poisoning prevention;

(6) reducing the current uncertainties of liability related to lead-based paint in rental housing by clarifying standards of care for landlords and lenders, and by exploring the "safe harbor" concept;

(7) increasing the availability of liability insurance for owners of rental housing and certified contractors and establishing alternative systems to compensate victims of lead-based paint poisoning; and

(8) evaluating the utility and appropriateness of requiring risk assessments or inspections and notification to prospective lessees of rental housing.

#### (d) Compensation

The members of the task force shall not receive Federal compensation for their participation.

(Pub. L. 102–550, title X, §1015, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 3908.)
### §668. Encouragement of States to adopt civil procedure for establishing paternity in contested cases

In the administration of the child support enforcement program under this part, each State is encouraged to establish and implement a civil procedure for establishing paternity in contested cases.

(Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title IV, §468, as added Pub. L. 100–485, title I, §111(d), Oct. 13, 1988, 102 Stat. 2350; amended Pub. L. 104–193, title III, §331(c), Aug. 22, 1996, 110 Stat. 2230.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1996—Pub. L. 104–193 struck out "a simple civil process for voluntarily acknowledging paternity and" after "implement".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1996 Amendment

For effective date of amendment by Pub. L. 104–193, see section 395(a)–(c) of Pub. L. 104–193, set out as a note under section 654 of this title.