alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

BUBBLE GUM PRODUCTIONS, LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DOES 1 – 37, 

Defendants. 

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-00595 

Judge: Honorable Joan H. Lefkow 

Magistrate: Honorable Susan E. Cox 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO TAKE DISCOVERY 

 PRIOR TO THE RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE 

 Plaintiff, through its undersigned counsel, hereby moves this Court ex parte for an Order 

granting limited discovery prior to the Rule 26(f) Conference. This motion is based upon the 

case record, attached memorandum and authorities cited therein, and the attached Declaration of 

Peter Hansmeier. Plaintiff seeks to issue subpoenas pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 limited to the 

following categories of entities and information: 

From Internet Service Providers (ISPs) identified in the Exhibit A attached to the 

Complaint and any other entity identified as a provider of Internet services to one of the 

Doe Defendants in response to a subpoena or as a result of ongoing BitTorrent activity 

monitoring: information sufficient to identify each Defendant, including name, current 

(and permanent) address, telephone number, e-mail address, and Media Access Control 

address. 

 Any information disclosed to the Plaintiff in response to a Rule 45 subpoena will be used 

by the Plaintiff solely for the purpose of protecting Plaintiff’s rights as set forth in its Complaint. 

Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 12 Filed: 02/15/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:54
2 

 

 For all the reasons articulated in the attached memorandum, Plaintiff respectfully asks the 

Court to grant this motion and enter an Order substantially in the form of the attached Proposed 

Order. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Bubble Gum Productions, LLC 

DATED: February 15, 2012 

By: /s/ Paul Duffy 

 Paul Duffy (Bar No. 6210496) 

 Prenda Law Inc. 

 161 N. Clark St., Suite 3200 

 Chicago, IL 60601 

 Telephone: (312) 880-9160 

 Facsimile: (312) 893-5677 

 E-mail: paduffy@wefightpiracy.com 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 12 Filed: 02/15/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:55
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C 20460 

JUL 11 2011 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIAl ION 

Mr. Michael J. Nasi 

Counsel for Gulf Coast Lignite Coalition 

Jackson Walker L.L.P. 

100 Congress Avenue, Suite 1100 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Dear Mr. Nasi: 

Thank you for your letter of May 18, 20 II, requesting an extension of the public comment period for the 

proposed "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Coal- and Oil-fired Electric 

Utility Steam Generating Units and Standards of Performance for Fossil-Fuel-Fired Electric Utility, 

Industrial-Commercial-Institutional, and Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating 

Units" (the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule), which was published in the Federal Register on 

May 3, 20 II. The proposal identified a public comment period of 60 days; that period would have ended 

on July 5, 2011. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, however, recently announced an extension 

of the comment period by 30 days to August 4. 

While we are extending the comment period, we are not seeking to extend the November 16,2011, 

deadline for signature of the final rule, and remain committed to meeting that deadline. 

The 30-day extension will provide the public with a 140-day period to review the proposal. As you 

know, interested parties were aware of the posting on March 16,2011, of the signed proposal on the 

EPA's website (http://www.epa.gov/ttniatw/utility/utilitypg.html), along with much of the pertinent 

supporting documentation (including the analyses used in establishing the proposed emission limits and 

the technical support documents). The proposal was published a little over six weeks later, on May 3, 

marking the beginning of the formal public comment period. This will provide the public with 

approximately 140 days to review and provide written comments on the proposed rule and supporting 

documents. It will also provide at least 60 days for other documentation that was not posted on the 

website until after the proposed rule was signed. Due to the substantive issues specific to this 

rulemaking, this comment period is significantly longer than statutorily required. 

Again, thank you for your letter. We look forward to the timely receipt of your comments. 

Internet Address (URL)' http llwww epagov 


Recycled/Recy clable , Pnf1ted With Vegetable 0 ,1 Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer Process ChlOrine Free Recycled Pape.
Secretary’s Order No. 2007-A-0055

Re: Approval of a Revision to Delaware’s State Implementation Plan Entitled,

“Implementation, Maintenance, And Enforcement of National Ambient Air

Quality Standards for Ozone, Fine Particulate Matter and Visibility”

Date of Issuance: December 13, 2007

Effective Date: December 13, 2007

Under the authority vested in the Secretary of the Department of Natural

Resources and Environmental Control (“Department” or “DNREC”) under 29 Del. C.

§8OO1 et seq. and 7 Del. C. .ç6010(c), the following findings, reasons and conclusions

are entered as an Order of the Secretary in the above-referenced matter.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) delegated authority

to the Department to administer certain responsibilities in Delaware under the federal

Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 US. C.çç 7401 et seq. (“CAA”). The delegation included

preparing Delaware’s State Implementation Plan (“SIP”), which consists of regulations,

source specific requirements, plans and emission inventories that together identifies how

Delaware will attain and maintain air quality that conforms to primary and secondary

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”). NAAQS are established by EPA

regulations, and Delaware’s SIP is reflected in EPA’s regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 52,

Subpart I. The Delaware SIP is subject to ongoing revisions, which reflects Delaware’s

progress towards the goal of cleaner air quality. The SIP provides a road map of the

Ve€a 44vze 4 e7oad 1ai’ae deAeed4 o
approves as reasonable the November 8, 2007 Report, which is adopted unchanged

except for reflecting its December 13, 2007 date of final approval. The final Report is

attached hereto as Appendix A, and together with this Order will be submitted to EPA as

the latest Delaware SIP revision; and

2. The Department shall have this Order published in the Delaware Register

ofRegulations and in newspapers in the same manner as the notice of the proposed SIP

revision.

John A. Hughes,

Secretary

3
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

Ms. Kathleen M. Roberts 

Executive Director 

DEC 10 2013 

Biobased and Renewable Products Advocacy Group 

2200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite lOOW 

Washington, DC 20037 

Dear Ms. Roberts: 

I am writing to confirm that on October 7, 2015, the U.S. Enviromnental Protection Agency 

(EPA) received your petition requesting that the EPA promulgate a rule pursuant to Section 

8 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) establishing a process to amend the list of 

natural sources of oils and fats in the Soap and Detergent Association nomenclature system. 

Your petition has been filed pursuant to Section 21 of TSCA and, as required under this 

section. the EPA will either grant or deny your petition within 90 days of the date \Ve 

received your petition, or by January 4, 2016. If the EPA grants your petition, then the 

agency will promptly commence an appropriate proceeding. If the EPA denies your 

petition in whole or in part, then the agency will publish the reasons for denial in the 

Federal Register. 

If you have any questions relating to your petition or the EPA's guidelines for Section 21 

petitions, feel free to contact David Widawsky of my staff at (202) 566-2215 or 

Widawsky .David@epa.gov. 

Sincerely, 

WQ.>J.~ c.~~~ Wendy Cleland-Hamnett 

Director 

Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 

Internet Address (URL) • http //www.epa gov 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed Wllh Vegetable Orl Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper
### §583. Foreign standards; certification of compliance

Where the government of the country to which the shipment is to be made has standards or requirements as to condition of apples, the Secretary may in addition to inspection and certification for compliance with the standards established or designated hereunder inspect and certify for determination as to compliance with the standards or requirements of such foreign government and may provide for special certificates in such cases.

(June 10, 1933, ch. 59, §3, 48 Stat. 124; Pub. L. 106–96, §1(c)(2), Nov. 12, 1999, 113 Stat. 1321.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1999—Pub. L. 106–96 struck out "or pears" after "of apples".
### §6810. Confidentiality

#### (a) Prohibition

No information on how a person voted in a referendum conducted under this chapter shall be made public.

#### (b) Penalty

Any person who knowingly violates subsection (a) or the confidentiality terms of an order, as described in section 6804(j)(2) of this title, shall be subject to a fine of not less than $1,000 nor more than $10,000 or to imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both. If the person is an officer or employee of the Department of Agriculture or the PromoFlor Council, the person shall be removed from office.

#### (c) Additional prohibition

No information obtained under this chapter may be made available to any agency or officer of the Federal Government for any purpose other than the implementation of this chapter or an investigatory or enforcement action necessary for the implementation of this chapter.

#### (d) Withholding information from Congress prohibited

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to authorize the withholding of information from Congress.

(Pub. L. 103–190, §11, Dec. 14, 1993, 107 Stat. 2288.)
### §4913. Suspension or termination of plans

(a) Whenever the Secretary finds that a plan or any provision thereof obstructs or does not tend to effectuate the declared policy of this chapter, the Secretary shall terminate or suspend the operation of the plan or provision.

(b) The Secretary may conduct a referendum at any time, and shall hold a referendum on request of the Board or at least 10 percent of the combined total of the watermelon producers, handlers, and importers eligible to vote in a referendum, to determine if watermelon producers, handlers, and importers favor the termination or suspension of the plan. The Secretary shall terminate or suspend the plan at the end of the marketing year whenever the Secretary determines that the termination or suspension is favored by a majority of those voting in the referendum, and who produce, handle, or import more than 50 per cent of the combined total of the volume of the watermelons produced by the producers, handled by the handlers, or imported by the importers voting in the referendum.

(Pub. L. 99–198, title XVI, §1654, Dec. 23, 1985, 99 Stat. 1630; Pub. L. 103–189, §8(j), Dec. 14, 1993, 107 Stat. 2263.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1993—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 103–189, §8(j)(3), struck out at end "Any such referendum shall be conducted at county extension offices."

Pub. L. 103–189, §8(j)(2)(C), which directed the substitution of ", handled by the handlers, or imported by the importers" for "or handled by the handlers," in second sentence, was executed by making the substitution in text which did not contain a comma after the word "handlers", to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Pub. L. 103–189, §8(j)(1)–(2)(B), in first sentence, substituted "at least 10 percent of the combined total" for "10 per centum or more" and ", handlers, and importers" for "and handlers" in two places, and in second sentence, substituted ", handle, or import" for "or handle" and "50 percent of the combined total" for "50 per centum".
### §2612. Definitions

As used in this chapter:

(a) The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of Agriculture.

(b) The term "person" means any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other entity.

(c) The term "potatoes" means all varieties of Irish potatoes grown by producers in the 50 States of the United States, and grown in foreign countries and imported into the United States.

(d) The term "handler" means any person (except a common or contract carrier of potatoes owned by another person) who handles potatoes in a manner specified in a plan issued pursuant to this chapter or in the rules and regulations issued thereunder.

(e) The term "producer" means any person engaged in the growing of five or more acres of potatoes.

(f) The term "promotion" means any action taken by the National Potato Promotion Board, pursuant to this chapter, to present a favorable image for potatoes to the public with the express intent of improving their competitive positions and stimulating sales of potatoes and shall include, but shall not be limited to, paid advertising.

(g) The term "importer" means any person who imports tablestock, frozen, or processed potatoes for ultimate consumption by humans or seed potatoes into the United States.

(Pub. L. 91–670, title III, §303, Jan. 11, 1971, 84 Stat. 2041; Pub. L. 101–624, title XIX, §1937, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3866.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1990—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 101–624, §1937(1), substituted "50" for "forty-eight contiguous" and inserted before the period at the end ", and grown in foreign countries and imported into the United States".

Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 101–624, §1937(2), added subsec. (g).
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 21, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-41482

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JESUS ENRIQUE NAVARRO-LOPEZ, also

known as Valente Lopez-Cortez,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. B-03-CR-519-1

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

Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jesus Enrique Navarro-Lopez appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United

States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Navarro-Lopez contends that the “felony” and “aggravated felony”

provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional. 

He therefore argues that his conviction must be reduced to one

under the lesser included offense found in 8 U.S.C. § 1362(a),
No. 03-41482

-2-

his judgment must be reformed to reflect a conviction only under

that provision, and his sentence must be vacated and the case

remanded for resentencing to no more than two years’ imprisonment

and one year of supervised release. 

In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Navarro-Lopez acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres, but asserts that the decision has been cast

into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
Record of Di scuss i on Docket No . FAA- Dir ectorate Identifi er: - AD 

### With whom outside th e FAA bas this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Hold er, manufacturer , ATA, NBAA , RAA , AOPA, ALPA, GAMA , etc)?

ORGANIZAT ION PERSON CONTACTED DATE T OPI CS DI SCUSSED 

### A4A Bob Ireland 

### 1/ 22/2014 No response. (rireland@airlines. or 

### g)

Other/ Additional In formation:
<PAGE>

                                                               Exhibit 15








TXU Gas Company:

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited condensed
consolidated interim financial information of TXU Gas Company and subsidiaries
(TXU Gas) for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2003 and 2002, as
indicated in our report dated May 15, 2003; because we did not perform an audit,
we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in TXU Gas'
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-85769,
333-85769-01, 333-85769-02 and 333-85769-03 on Form S-3.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.



DELOITTE & TOUCHE  LLP
Dallas, Texas
May 15, 2003
### §3401. Congressional findings and declaration of policy

(a) Wheat is basic to the American diet and the American economy. It is grown by thousands of farmers and consumed, in various forms, by millions of people in the United States.

(b) The size of the American wheat crop and how it is marketed and ultimately consumed determines whether many Americans receive adequate nourishment. Wheat has a strong impact on the Nation's well-being. Additional research on the optimal use of wheat products can improve the American diet. Consumer education about the nutritional value and economic use of wheat products can enhance the national welfare.

(c) It has long been recognized that it is in the national interest to have a regular, adequate, and high quality wheat supply. It would be extremely difficult, without an effective coordinated research and nutrition education effort, to accomplish this objective. A programed effort of research and nutrition education is of great importance to wheat producers, processors, end product manufacturers, and consumers.

(d) It is the purpose of this chapter and in the public interest to authorize and enable the creation of an orderly procedure, adequately financed through an assessment, for the development and initiation of an effective and continuous coordinated program of research and nutrition education, designed to improve and enhance the quality, and make the most efficient use, of American wheat, processed wheat, and wheat end products to ensure an adequate diet for the people of the United States. The maximum rate of assessment authorized hereunder represents an infinitesimal proportion of the overall cost of manufacturing wheat end products. Therefore, such assessment will not significantly affect the retail prices of those products. Furthermore, any price effect will be more than offset by the increased efficiency in end product manufacture and increased consumer acceptance, due to nutritional improvements in wheat products, which may be expected to follow from adoption of a plan under this chapter. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to provide for control of production or otherwise limit the right of individual wheat producers to produce wheat.

(Pub. L. 95–113, title XVII, §1702, Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 1031.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1977, see section 1901 of Pub. L. 95–113, set out as an Effective Date of 1977 Amendment note under section 1307 of this title.

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 95–113, title XVII, §1701, Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 1031, provided that: "This title [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the 'Wheat and Wheat Foods Research and Nutrition Education Act'."

#### Separability

Pub. L. 95–113, title XVII, §1718, Sept. 29, 1977, 91 Stat. 1040, provided that: "If any provision of this title [this chapter] or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the validity of the remainder of the title and of the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected thereby."
### §2009b. National objectives

The national objectives of the program established under this subchapter shall be to—

(1) promote strategic development activities and collaborative efforts by State and local communities, and federally recognized Indian tribes, to maximize the impact of Federal assistance;

(2) optimize the use of resources;

(3) provide assistance in a manner that reflects the complexity of rural needs, including the needs for business development, health care, education, infrastructure, cultural resources, the environment, and housing;

(4) advance activities that empower, and build the capacity of, State and local communities to design unique responses to the special needs of the State and local communities, and federally recognized Indian tribes, for rural development assistance; and

(5) adopt flexible and innovative approaches to solving rural development problems.

(Pub. L. 87–128, title III, §381C, as added Pub. L. 104–127, title VII, §761, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 1139.)
### §417. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 417 was editorially reclassified as section 7643 of this title.