alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 

THOMAS A. CAMERON,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CR05-0382-RSL-JPD

DETENTION ORDER 

Offenses charged: 

Count 1: Possession of an Unregistered Firearm in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5861(d) and

5871.

Date of Detention Hearing: February 16, 2006.

The Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and

based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention hereafter set forth, finds

the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) Defendant is serving a sentence from state-court charges and is currently in

custody. Therefore, defendant has stipulated to detention reserving the right to contest his

continued detention if there is a material change in circumstances.

Case 2:05-cr-00382-RSL Document 24 Filed 02/16/06 Page 1 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 2

(2) There are no conditions or combination of conditions that will reasonably assure

the appearance of defendant as required or ensure the safety of the community.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the custody of the

Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility separate, to the extent

practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal;

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with

counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which defendant

is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose

of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and

(4) The Clerk shall direct copies of this Order to counsel for the United States, to

counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United States

Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 16th day of February, 2006.

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:05-cr-00382-RSL Document 24 Filed 02/16/06 Page 2 of 2
RAKESH VERMA,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-5389

Opinion filed February 3, 2017.

Petition for Writ of Prohibition -- Original Jurisdiction.

Rakesh Verma, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of prohibition is dismissed as unauthorized. See Logan v. 

State, 846 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 2004).

ROBERTS, C.J., WOLF and B.L. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
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

ORDER 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

COMMISSION and JANICE LOWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

LABOR READY NORTHWEST, INC.,

LABOR READY, INC., and IFA

NURSERIES, INC., 

Defendants.

No. C05-5671RBL

ORDER GRANTING IN

PART PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR A

PROTECTIVE ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s

(“EEOC”) Motion for a Protective Order [Dkt. # 40]. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c), Plaintiff seeks to

prevent Defendants’ deposition of the EEOC where such deposition would lead to information that is

unreasonably cumulative or privileged. Plaintiff further seeks to prevent Defendants from impermissibly

challenging the adequacy of the administrative investigation by the EEOC. 

The Court agrees. First, defendants are prevented from seeking privileged information, including

information that compromises the attorney-client privilege, the work product privilege, and the

governmental deliberative process privilege. See e.g. Dept. of the Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairs v.

Klamath Water Users Prot. Ass’n, 532 U.S. 1, 2 (2001) (quoting NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., 421

Case 3:05-cv-05671-RBL Document 54 Filed 04/13/06 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

ORDER 2

U.S. 132, 150 (1975) (holding that the governmental deliberative process privilege protects “documents

reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations, and deliberations comprising part of a process by which

governmental decisions and policies are formulated.”) Second, there is no such thing as an affirmative

defense asserting that the administrative investigation was inadequate. See EEOC v. Keco Indus., 748 F.2d

1097, 1100 (6th Cir. 1984). The issue at hand is whether Defendants discriminated against Janice Lowell,

and that is the only issue that will be determined on the merits at trial. 

With regard to the issue at hand, the Court acknowledges Defendants’ desire to seek factual

information to help it understand the EEOC’s claim against it. To that end, the Court permits the

Defendants to depose the EEOC investigator assigned to Janice Lowell’s case. The investigator may help

clarify for the Defendants any information in documents that the EEOC already delivered. However, the

deposition will be subject to the limitations described above. If Defendants request any information or

analysis that would compromise EEOC’s privileges, EEOC counsel may object. The parties may bring to

this Court any disputes they cannot settle amongst themselves.

In summary, the Court GRANTS IN PART the Plaintiff’s Motion for Protective Order [Dkt. #40]. 

Defendant will be permitted to depose the EEOC investigator subject to limitations in this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 13th day of April, 2006.

A

RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05671-RBL Document 54 Filed 04/13/06 Page 2 of 2
| (a) | A      review of CBSD’s servicing activities as of and for the twelve months      ended December 31, 2008 and of CBSD’s performance under the servicing      agreement related to such trust has been made under my      supervision. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (b) | To      the best of my knowledge, based on such review, CBSD has fulfilled all of      its servicing obligations under the servicing agreement related to such      trust in all material respects as of and for the twelve months ended      December 31, 2008. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | March      18, 2009 |
|--------|---------------------|

| By:    | /s/ Kendall      Stork                    |
|--------|------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:       Kendall      Stork            |
|   | Title:   President and      CEO |
Exhibit 32.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SEC.1350

(SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002)

 

In connection with the Annual Report of, Sears Oil and GasCorporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, G. Reed Petersen, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Director ofthe Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

     (1)  The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

     (2)  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated:  February 13, 2013

 

By:  /s /G.Reed Petersen

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

     G. Reed Petersen, President,

     Chief Executive Officer,

     and Director
From: unitedengraving1@bex.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:25:37 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Sandra Becker

Temperance, MI 48182
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 WESTERN DISTRICT of WASHINGTON

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

COMMISSION,

 

 Plaintiff, 

 

 vs. 

MAZATLAN RESTAURANTS, INC.,

 Defendant.

 C05-1657 JCC

 MINUTE ORDER

 REASSIGNING CASE

Pursuant to the Amended General Order entered by the Chief Judge on

November 3, 2004, this action has been reassigned to the Honorable John C. Coughenour, United

States District Judge. 

All future documents filed in this case must bear the cause number C05-1657 JCC and

bear the Judge’s name in the upper right hand corner of the document.

Dated this 15th day of November, 2005

BRUCE RIFKIN

Clerk of Court

by: /s/ PETER H. VOELKER

 Peter H. Voelker, Deputy Clerk

Case 2:05-cv-01657-JCC Document 10 Filed 11/15/05 Page 1 of 1
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 386 

Recognizing the Coast Guard, the Coast Guard Auxiliary, and the National 

Safe Boating Council for their efforts to promote National Safe Boating 

Week. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2007 

Mrs. DRAKE (for herself, Mr. MICA, Mr. LATOURETTE, and Mr. LOBIONDO) 

submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the Coast Guard, the Coast Guard Auxiliary, 

and the National Safe Boating Council for their efforts 

to promote National Safe Boating Week. 

Whereas recreational boating is one of our Nation’s most 

popular pastimes, with an estimated 78,000,000 recreational boaters in the United States and nearly 

13,000,000 recreational vessels registered; 

Whereas the number of recreational boating fatalities has declined by more than half since 1970, thanks to the increased use of life jackets, cooperative boating safety education, enforcement efforts between the Coast Guard and 

State governments, and safer vessels and equipment 

manufactured in accordance with Coast Guard standards; 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•HRES 386 IH 

Whereas recreational boating accidents have nevertheless 

claimed the lives of 697 Americans in 2005, more than 

half of whose lives could have been saved with the proper 

use of a personal flotation device; 

Whereas a continued emphasis on accident prevention can reduce recreational boating fatalities still further, and in 

particular deaths by drowning, which remain the leading 

cause of recreational boating fatalities; and 

Whereas the National Safe Boating Council, with the support 

of the Coast Guard and the Coast Guard Auxiliary, has 

proposed designating the week of May 19 through 25, 

2007, as National Safe Boating Week: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports initiatives for recreational boating 

3 safety education and accident prevention to minimize 

4 the number of annual recreational boating fatalities; 

5 (2) recognizes the Coast Guard, the Coast 

6 Guard Auxiliary, and the National Safe Boating 

7 Council for their efforts each year during May to 

8 highlight the importance of safe recreational boat9 ing; and 

10 (3) supports the goals of National Safe Boating 

11 Week. 

Æ 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
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

 ORDER

Page - 1

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

VINCENT DANIEL HOPPER,

 Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN DOE MYERS RECREATIONAL

COACH NORTHWEST DETENTION

CENTER, et al,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5680 RBL

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes on before the above-entitled Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion to Reinstate the

Injunctive Claims [Dkt. #85].

Having considered the entirety of the records and file herein, the Court rules as follows:

On June 21, 2006 this Court entered an Order Adopting Report and Recommendation Regarding

Defendants’ First Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. #82] dismissing plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief. Plaintiff has

filed the instant motion to reinstate those claims. The Court construes the motion as a motion for

reconsideration. The claims were initially dismissed because plaintiff had been transferred out of the Northwest

Detention Center and therefore lacked standing to bring the claims. However, plaintiff has now been returned

to the Northwest Detention Center and now has standing to bring claims for injunctive relief. It is therefore

ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion [Dkt. #85] is GRANTED. Plaintiff may prosecute his claims

against defendants for injunctive relief.

The Clerk shall send uncertified copies of this order to all counsel of record, and to any party appearing

Case 3:05-cv-05680-RBL Document 99 Filed 09/08/06 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

 ORDER

Page - 2

pro se.

Dated this 8th day of September, 2006.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05680-RBL Document 99 Filed 09/08/06 Page 2 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

ORDER — 1

CR05-5785RBL 

 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

Judge Ronald B. Leighton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

) NO. CR05-5785RBL

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

) ORDER DISMISSING THE

SUZETTE BLAND, ) SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT

)

Defendant. ) )

Before this Court is a Motion to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment without

prejudice. The Court finds, after a consideration of all relevant information and the

circumstances of this case, that the charges in the Superseding Indictment should be

dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED

DATED this 28th day of February, 2008 

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented by:

NORMAN M. BARBOSA

Assistant United States Attorney

Case 3:05-cr-05785-RBL Document 114 Filed 02/28/08 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2


Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


and Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)











My name is Rizalyn Cabrillas and I am the Chief Financial Officer and Secretary Treasurer of Eaglecrest Resources, Inc. (the “Company”).





I hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 that to the best of my knowledge and belief:





(1)
the Annual Report on Form 10-KA for the year ended January 31, 2011, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“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 the operations of Eaglecrest Resources, Inc. as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.





RIZALYN CABRILLAS


Rizalyn Cabrillas


Chief Financial Officer and


Secretary Treasurer


Eaglecrest Resources, Inc.





Date: February 20, 2012
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

Dated this 7th day of March , 2006

/S/ PETER H. VOELKER 

 Deputy Clerk

MINUTE ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the WESTERN DISTRICT of WASHINGTON

BONNIE J. ORR and RUFUS D. ORR,

 Plaintiff,

)

)

)

vs. )

) C05-1610 JPD

CITY OF SEATTLE,

 Defendant.

)

)

) MINUTE ORDER

The following Minute Order is made at the direction of the Court, the Honorable 

James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge:

Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Continuance (dkt #19) is hereby noted for Tuesday, March 14,

2006. Should defendant City of Seattle wish to respond to the motion, the response shall be filed

no later than noon, Monday, March 13, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-01610-JPD Document 20 Filed 03/07/06 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 66669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21372]



[[Page 66667]]

Vol. 88

Wednesday,

No. 186

September 27, 2023

Part III





The President





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



Memorandum of September 15, 2023--Delegation of Authority Under Section 
404(c) of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008



Presidential Determination No. 2023-11 of September 15, 2023--
Presidential Determination and Certification With Respect to the Child 
Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008



Presidential Determination No. 2023-12 of September 15, 2023--
Presidential Determination on Major Drug Transit or Major Drug Illicit 
Countries for Fiscal Year 2024


                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 2023 
/ Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 66669]]

                Memorandum of September 15, 2023

                
Delegation of Authority Under Section 404(c) of 
                the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State

                By the authority vested in me as President by the 
                Constitution and the laws of the United States of 
                America, including section 301 of title 3, United 
                States Code, I hereby delegate to the Secretary of 
                State for Fiscal Year 2024 the authority under section 
                404(c)(1) of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 
                (22 U.S.C. 2370c-1(c)(1)) (CSPA) to waive the 
                application of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the 
                CSPA with respect to Rwanda, to waive the application 
                of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the CSPA with 
                respect to Turkey to allow for the provision of Foreign 
                Military Financing and Excess Defense Articles, and to 
                make the determination and certification necessary for 
                such waivers. I hereby also delegate to the Secretary 
                of State the authority under section 404(c)(2) of the 
                CSPA to notify the appropriate congressional committees 
                of such waivers and the justification for granting such 
                waivers, and to publish the determination for such 
                waivers in the Federal Register.

                You are hereby authorized and directed to publish this 
                memorandum in the Federal Register.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, September 15, 2023

[FR Doc. 2023-21372
Filed 9-26-23; 11:15 am]
Billing code 4710-10-P
Case No. 10,230.

#### NICHOLLS v. HAZEL.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 95.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term, 1813.

Replevin — Discontinuance—Reinstatement.

The court will not reinstate a replevin which has been discontinued at a previous term.

Mr. Blake, for defendant,

moved the court to reinstate an action of replevin, which had been discontinued at December term, 1812, by reason of the non-appearance of the plaintiff.

But THE COURT refused.
From: mlgrego@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:50:47 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

mike gregory

Waynesville, MO 65583