alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Shelter Manufacturing / Assembly  Strategic Manufacturing Unit  General Fulfillment

Vertek International Inc. 2297 Niels B ohr Ct. Suite 207, San Diego, CA 92154

Tel 619.6616868 e-mail sales@bcmanufacturing.com www.bcmanufacturing.com March 19 th , 2012

The Honorable Ray LaHood U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Alaska Airlines’ application for SAN-DCA, Docket No. DOT-OST-2012-0029.

Dear Secretary LaHood:

Vertek International Inc. fully supports the a pplication of Alaska Airlines for air service between San Diego and Washington Reagan Nationa l Airport (DCA). San Diego is the largest region without announc ed service to DCA. Additionally, due to the profound community of interest between San Di ego and the nation’s capital, the region generates the largest passenger market demand without nonstop service to the

convenient and close-in air port serving our nation’s capital

.

San Diego’s sheer market size to Washingt on coupled with the fact that San Diego – Dulles average airfares are the highest of west coast cities should qualify it for a pair of

the limited slots avai lable. The high airfare is exacer bated when factoring in taxi fares from Dulles to Washington’s city center t hat average about $60 each way. This means travelers between Washington’s city c enter and San Diego via Dulles can pay on average close to $400 one-way.

There are also countless other San Di ego-based and Washin gton-based businesses that are engaged in health science, telecomm unications, and national defense that need quick and convenient access to Reagan National Airport. Vertek International Inc. has an immediate need for additional nonstop air serv ice to our nation’s capital. Alaska

Airlines service would add a needed nonstop option to a primary gateway to Washington, DC. Vertek International In c. joins with the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, the San Diego Regional Econ omic Development Corporation, the World Trade Center San Diego, and the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce in support of Alaska Airlines’ application for San Diego – Washington Reagan National

slots.Shelter Manufacturing / Assembly  Strategic Manufacturing Unit  General Fulfillment

Vertek International Inc. 2297 Niels B ohr Ct. Suite 207, San Diego, CA 92154

Tel 619.6616868 e-mail sales@bcmanufacturing.com www.bcmanufacturing.com We thank the Department of Transportati on for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced docket and we hope to hear of a favorable review of Alaska Airlines’ San Diego – DCA proposal soon.

Sincerely,

Tomas Sibaja Director of Business Development

*Board Member of the Worl d Trade Center San Diego
#### WINGERATH, Respondent, v. NORWOOD, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

September 28, 1906.)

Action by William Wingerath against Edmund H. Norwood, sued as Edward Norwood.

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Docket Number FAA-2015-0082

 Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed?
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3023 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3023

        To suspend temporarily the duty on waste of camel hair.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 24, 2006

Mr. Lieberman (for himself and Mr. Dodd) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To suspend temporarily the duty on waste of camel hair.

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

SECTION 1. WASTE OF CAMEL HAIR.

    (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:

``      9902.12.21       Waste of camel     Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         hair (provided                                                     31/2009
                         for in subheading
                         5103.20.00)......

    (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>
```
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### JUL 6 1998 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. MICHAEL FYKES, Defendant-Appellant. No. 98-1103 (D.C. No. 92-CR-149-M) (District of Colorado)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before PORFILIO , KELLY , and HENRY , Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. Th e case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Michael Fykes appeals the district court’s denial o f his motion to modify his term of imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 35 82(c). We affirm because his- 2 -

argument for modification is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Kissick , 69 F.3d 1048 (10th Cir. 1995). A jury convicted Mr. Fykes of conspiracy to distrib ute cocaine base and possession with intent to distribute cocaine base i n violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. On December 4, 1992, the distri ct court sentenced him to 100 months in prison. Mr. Fykes asks that we modify hi s sentence because the district court did not have before it evidence that showed t he cocaine base fit the definition of crack in U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 as amended by the Sentencing Commission’s Amendment 487. In Kissick , we held that we would not apply Amendment 487 retroactively because it is not liste d in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10 and is substantive, rather than clarifying. See Kissick , 69 F.3d at 1052-53. The district court sentenced Mr. Fykes in December 1992 and Amendment 487, which Kissick held non-retroactive, did not become effective unti l almost a year later, in November 1993. Therefore, Mr. Fykes may not rely o n Amendment 487’s definition of crack as a basis for modification of his sentence. We affirm the denial of the motion to modify. The mandate shall issue forthwith. Entered for the Court,

Robert H. Henry Circuit Judge
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

In the Interest of B.M.W., a Minor Child

No. 06-14-00028-CV

Appeal from the 6th District Court of 

Lamar County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 81876). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice 

Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Carter participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed. 

Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. 

Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JULY 24, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

ROSALYN KENDALL, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06cv676-ID

)

USAA INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

The parties are hereby reminded of the obligation, imposed by Rule 26(f) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to confer and to develop a proposed discovery plan. 

The Rule 26(f) report containing the discovery plan shall be filed as soon as practicable,

but no later than September 13, 2006.

The longstanding practice in this district is that dispositive motions shall be filed

no later than 90 days prior to the pretrial date. If the parties seek to vary from that

schedule, they should present, in the plan, specific case related reasons for the requested

variance. 

This case will be set for trial before the undersigned judge during one of that

judge's regularly scheduled civil trial terms. The pretrial date is normally set within 4 to

6 weeks of a scheduled trial term. The dates of each judge's civil trial terms are available

on the court's website, www.almd.uscourts.gov.

Case 2:06-cv-00676-ID-DRB Document 8 Filed 08/30/2006 Page 1 of 2
The court may or may not hold a scheduling conference before issuing a

scheduling order. If the court holds a scheduling conference, counsel may participate in

the scheduling conference by conference call.

The scheduling order entered by the court will follow the form of the Uniform

Scheduling Order adopted by the Judges of this court. The Uniform Scheduling Order is

also available on the court's website. 

The report of the parties should comply with Form 35 of the Appendix of Forms to

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

DONE this 30 day of August, 2006. th

 /s/ Ira DeMent 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00676-ID-DRB Document 8 Filed 08/30/2006 Page 2 of 2
#### § 983.86 Agents.

The Secretary may, by a designation in writing, name any person, including any officer or employee of the United States Government, or name any service, division or branch in the United States Department of Agriculture, to act as agent or representative of the Secretary in connection with any of the provisions of this part.

[69 FR 17850, Apr. 4, 2004. Redesignated at 74 FR 56540, Nov. 2, 2009]
HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27485 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27486 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27487 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27488 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27489 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27490 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27491 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27492 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27493 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27494 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27495 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27496 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27497 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27498 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27499 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27500 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27501 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27502 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27503 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27504 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27505 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27506 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27507 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27508 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27509 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27510 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27511 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27512 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27513 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27514 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27515 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27516 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27517 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27518 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27519 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27520 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27521 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27522 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27523 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27524 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27525 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27526 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27527 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27528 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27529 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27530 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27531 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27532 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27533 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27534 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27535 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27536 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27537 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27538 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27539 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27540 1989HeinOnline -- 54 Fed. Reg. 27541 1989
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 17

- 13927 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No s . 0:16

- cv - 61325

- RNS , 0:12

- cr - 60294

- RNS

- 1
GREGORY RICHARDSON, Petitioner

- Appellant,

versus UNITED STATES OF AMER ICA, Respondent

- Appellee.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

______________________ __ (February 8, 2019) Before WIL L IAM PRYOR , ROSENBAUM and GRANT , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Gregory Richardson, a federal prisoner, appeals the denial of his motion to vacate his sentence. 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . Richardson sought to vacate his conviction

Case: 17-13927 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 1 of 32 for brandishing a firearm during a bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (1)(A)(ii) , on the ground s that the residual clause in the definition of “crime of violence” in section 924(c), see id

. § 924(c)(3)(B), is void for vagueness after Jo h nson v. United States , 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) , and that bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a), d oes
not satisfy the elements clause of section 924(c), id

. § 924(c)(3)(A). The district court ruled that b ank robbery qualified as a predicate offense under the elements clause regardless of any effect that Johnson had on section 924(c). We affirm. Richardson ’s challenge to his sentence is foreclosed by our precedents. We held i n In re Sams , 830 F.3d 1234, 123 9 (11th Cir. 2016) , “ that a bank robbery conviction under § 2113(a) by force and violence or by intimidation qualifies as a crime of violence under the § 924(c)(3)(A) use

- of

- force clause .” Richardson argues that Sams adjudicated an application for leave to file a successive motion to vacate and is not precedential in his collateral proceeding. But we held in United States v. St. Hubert , 909 F.3d 335 (11th Cir. 2018) , “ that law established in published three

judge orders issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) in the context of applications for leave to file second or successive § 2255 motions is binding precedent on all subsequent panels of this Court, including those re viewing direct appeals and collateral attacks, unless and until it is overruled or undermined to the point of abrogation by the Supreme Court or by this court sitting en banc

. ” I d. at 346 ( alteration adopted and internal quotation marks and citation omitte d).

Case: 17-13927 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 2 of 33 Richardson’s predicate offense of bank robbery is categorically a crime of violence under the elements clause of section 924(c). We AFFIRM Richardson’s conviction and sentence. Case: 17-13927 Date Filed: 02/08/2019 Page: 3 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MAXIE MCNABB, )

)

Plaintiff ) CIVIL ACTION NO: 

) 2:06-0664-MHT

v. )

)

SANDERS LEAD COMPANY, INC. )

)

Defendant. )

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO LEAVE EVIDENTIARY RECORD OPEN

PENDING PRODUCTION OF PERSONNEL FILES 

Comes Now, the Plaintiff, Maxie McNabb, and moves to leave the summary

judgment evidentiary record open for the Plaintiff pending production of personnel files

maintained by the Defendant, Sanders Lead. As ground for this Motion, the Plaintiff

would state the following: 

1. On July 2, 2007, this Court ordered production of certain personnel

records maintained by Sanders Lead. ( See Doc. #24, Order Granting Motion To Compel).

 The production is to take place by July 11, 2007. 

2. As outlined in Plaintiff’s Memorandum in Opposition to Summary Judgment, 

Sander’s Lead re-hired younger persons who had been terminated for a variety of reasons.

 Prior to the reduction in force for economic reasons, McNabb had not been terminated.

 3. Plaintiff would like the opportunity to review the personnel records to be

produced and submit any relevant excerpts in opposition to the Defendant’s Motion for

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 27 Filed 07/03/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

Summary Judgment.

Wherefore premises considered, plaintiff requests that he be given ten days after

the defendant’s production up to and including July 23, 2007 to submit any additional

evidentiary material in opposition to summary judgment. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Roderick T. Cooks

Attorney for the Plaintiff

OF COUNSEL:

WINSTON COOKS, LLC

The Penick Building

319-17th Street North

Birmingham, AL 35203

Tel: (205)502-0970

Fax: (205)251-0231

email: rcooks@winstoncooks.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing document on all persons

listed below by CMF/Electronic Mail and/or U. S. Mail, postage prepaid and addressed to

them as follows:

Matthew M. Baker, Esq.

Cervera, Ralph & Reeves, LLC

P.O. Box 325

914 South Brundidge Street

Troy, Alabama 36081

(334) 566-0116

Done this the 3rd day of July, 2007.

s/Roderick T. Cooks

Of Counsel 

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 27 Filed 07/03/2007 Page 2 of 2
Subpart 1339.1 - General    **Parent topic:** PART 1339 - ACQUISITION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY1339.107 Contract clauses.       Insert clause 1352.239-70, *Software License Addendum,* in all contracts when the primary purpose is to purchase new software licenses or renew existing licenses.1339.107-70 Information security.       (a) For all service acquisitions over the micro-purchase threshold, contracting professionals shall coordinate with the designated Contracting Officer Representative (COR) to complete the *Information Security in Acquisition Checklist.*          (b) When the *Information Security in Acquisition Checklist* indicates that Clause 1352.239-73, *Security Requirements for Information Technology Resources,* is needed, contracting officers shall insert the clause in the solicitation and contracts. If the checklist indicates that the Certification and Accreditation requirement in Clause 1352.239-73 is not required, the contracting officer shall include the statement “*The Certification and Accreditation (C&A) requirements of Clause 1352.239-73 do not apply, and a Security Accreditation Package is not required”* in the statement of work.          (c) Contracting professionals shall insert the appropriate risk designation clause from CAM 1337.70 into DOC solicitations and contracts for services depending upon the level of contractor access privileges to DOC IT systems. In addition, contracting professionals shall document the official contract file to include the rationale for the designated risk level.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3217 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3217

     To suspend temporarily the duty on certain viscose rayon yarn.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 25, 2006

 Mr. Menendez introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To suspend temporarily the duty on certain viscose rayon yarn.

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

SECTION 1. VISCOSE RAYON YARN.

    (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:

      

``      9902.54.03        Single yarn of viscose  Free      No change       No change       On or before 12/
                           rayon, untwisted or                                               31/2009          ''
                           with a twist not                                                                    .
                           exceeding 120 turns/m
                           (provided for in
                           subheading
                           5403.31.00)..........

    (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>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000760386
<NAME> WELLELSEY III-D FDS 9/30/98
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         306,118
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  175,981
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,334
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               489,186
<PP&E>                                       4,012,068
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,750,350
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,750,904
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          110,677
<BONDS>                                        357,682
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        8,988,039
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (7,705,494)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,750,904
<SALES>                                      1,277,961
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,315,164
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   92,262
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               810,021
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (1,272)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,763
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                370,390
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            370,390
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   370,390
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    17.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### § 956.12 Committee.

*Committee* means the Walla Walla Sweet Onion Committee established pursuant to § 956.20.
705.002 [Reserved]

Parent topic: PART 705—PUBLICIZING CONTRACT ACTIONS
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

MAXIE McNABB, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 2:06cv664-MHT

) 

SANDERS LEAD COMPANY, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for leave to

keep evidentiary record open (Doc. No. 27) is granted to

the extent that plaintiff is allowed until July 23, 2007,

to submit any supplemental opposition to defendant’s

pending motion for summary judgment (Doc. No. 9).

DONE, this the 19th day of July, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 31 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 1 of 1