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

MINUTE ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

GERALD LEE ALEXANDER,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

STATE OF MAINE, et al.,

 Defendants.

CASE NO. C05-1617JLR

MINUTE ORDER

The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable

James L. Robart:

The court has received Plaintiff’s motions regarding his requests to the court to

subpoena a “pro se manual” (Dkt. # 5) as well as various government documents (Dkt. #

6). Because the court has no record that Plaintiff has served the Defendants with a

summons and a copy of his complaint, the court cannot consider Plaintiff’s motions at

this time, and therefore STRIKES them as improper. In the meantime, the court instructs

Plaintiff to submit an amended complaint by Friday, December 2, 2005, that alleges a

basis for this court’s jurisdiction and venue. Should Plaintiff fail to do so, the court will

dismiss this action.

Filed and entered this 8th day of November, 2005.

BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk

 s/Mary Duett

By Deputy Clerk

Case 2:05-cv-01617-JLR Document 7 Filed 11/08/05 Page 1 of 1
AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case r

United States District Court

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

DURINDA MEEKER,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner,

Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

Case No. C05-1713-JPD

 Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury

has rendered its verdict.

 X Decision by Court. This action came to consideration before the Court. The issues have been considered

and a decision has been rendered.

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED

The final decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

Dated this 8th day of June, 2006.

 BRUCE RIFKIN 

 Clerk

/s/ Peter Voelker 

Deputy Clerk

Case 2:05-cv-01713-JPD Document 16 Filed 06/07/06 Page 1 of 1
From: jarlrn@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:28:35 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,

Janice Long

Fort Wayne, IN 46815
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

RODNEY FORD,

 

 Plaintiff, 

 

 vs. 

SYMETRA FINANCIAL,

 Defendant.

 C05-1731 RSM

 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 Ricardo S. Martinez, United

States District Judge. 

All future documents filed in this case must bear the cause number C05-1731 RSM and

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

Dated this 30th day of November, 2005

BRUCE RIFKIN

Clerk of Court

by: /s/ PETER H. VOELKER

 Peter H. Voelker, Deputy Clerk

Case 2:05-cv-01731-RSM Document 7 Filed 11/30/05 Page 1 of 1
No. 69243.

#### Engis Equipment Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/22103-11513, etc. (Chicago).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of diamond coated files, less than 2% inches in length, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *J. E. Bernard & Co., Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(52 Cust. Ct. 56, C.D. 2436), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
**EXHIBIT 10.2****SUMMARY OF BOARD COMPENSATION**Non-employee directors of Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc. (the “Company”) receive compensationfor their services to the Board of Directors and related committees as follows:     **Amount** **Description**$50,000  Lead director annual retainer, disbursed in five equal payments for eachregularly scheduled Board meeting.      30,000  Annual retainer for all other non-employee directors, disbursed in five equalpayments for each regularly scheduled Board meeting.      10,000  Audit committee chairman annual retainer, disbursed in same manner as Boardmember annual retainer (excludes lead director).      5,000  Non-audit committee chairman annual retainer, disbursed in same manner as Boardmember annual retainer (excludes lead director).      3,000  Attendance fee for each in-person Board meeting.      1,250  Attendance fee for each telephonic Board meeting or committee meeting of any kind.All directors are reimbursed for expenses incurred in attending meetings of the Board of Directors.Each non-employee director of the Company currently receives, and will continue to receive, anannual award grant of 9,000 stock appreciation rights, which have a base price equal to the closingmarket price of the Company’s common stock on the date of the grant and are payable in shares ofcommon stock. Sally Frame Kasaks, who is the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, is not paidany fees or additional remuneration for her services as a member of the Board of Directors.
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

RODNEY CLARK, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SANDRA CARTER, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5613FDB

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND

DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION

TO STRIKE INFORMATION OF

SETTLEMENT OFFERS 

This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge

pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) and 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Magistrates' Rules MJR 1, MJR

3, and MJR 4. Before the court is plaintiff’s “supplemental” reply to defendants motion for summary

judgment. (Dkt. # 28). The reply also contains a motion for sanctions because defendants did not

conduct discovery after asking for an extension of time on a pending motion for summary judgment

so discovery could be conducted. (Dkt. # 28).

Defendants have responded, indicate discovery was not conducted because of a calendaring

error and counsel apologizes to the court and plaintiffs. Counsel indicates information was obtained

from the agency and defendants will be able to reply to pending motions. (Dkt. # 29). In the

Case 3:05-cv-05613-FDB Document 31 Filed 07/31/06 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

defendant’s response counsel asks that portions of plaintiff’s motion which mention settlement offers

be struck from the record. (Dkt. # 29).

Both motions are DENIED. Defendants have explained the failure to conduct discovery

after they asked for an extension of time. (Dkt. # 29).

While reference to settlement offers and settlement discussions is not admissible, the

information was not being submitted to show an admission of guilt. Instead the offers were

submitted to show the defendants were not responding to plaintiff’s offers. The information will

remain in the file but may not be cited by either party.

The parties are cautioned that the court fully intends to consider the pending motions for

summary judgment on the August noting date and they should concentrate their efforts on filing

timely responses and replies.

The clerk is directed to send a copy of this order to plaintiffs and counsel for defendants and

to remove Dkt # 28 and 29 from the court’s calendar.

DATED this 31st, day of July, 2006.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05613-FDB Document 31 Filed 07/31/06 Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 66473]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20995]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4591-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]


Poarch Band of Creek Indians; Amendment No. 7 to Notice of a 
Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the Poarch Band Creek Indians (FEMA-4591-DR), dated March 28, 2021, 
and related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on June 29, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency 
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the 
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Robert D. 
Samaan, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer 
for this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Gracia B. Szczech as 
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2023-20995 Filed 9-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
July 26, 2014 

To the Environmental Protection Agency 

On behalf of a local grassroots organization called Guardians of the Good Life, I 

urge you to adopt the strongest rules possible regarding greenhouse gas 

pollution from power plants. These companies have used our environment as a 

dumping ground for far too long, fouling our air and water and contributing to 

numerous health problems in the communities in which they operate. 

It is the people and the environment who pay the price for this pollution, and that 

is just plain wrong. Why should anyone be given a free pass to make others sick? 

Not only are these polluting greenhouse gases making people sick, they're 

making the planet sick -- climate change is a symptom of this. 

The Guardians support strong, robust rules to reign in greenhouse gas pollution 

and require these companies to do business in a responsible manner. Up to this 

point, they have not done so; therefore, we ask that you implement these 

regulations in spite of any arguments from the fossil fuel companies. We are at a 

crucial point in our history and every effort should be made to protect our 

environment and stave off catastrophic global climate change. 

Thank you. 

Sincerely 

Jane Wilson 

Guardians of the Good Life 

603 N. 36 St. #4 

Omaha, NE 68131
From: lawtinman@att.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:47:48 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,

VIRGIMIA WEIGUM SR

Saint Joseph, MO 64506
No. 68920.

Appeal 5189.

#### United States *v.*Kelvin *&*Hughes America Corp.—

C.D. 2468. Appeal dismissed September 28, 1964.
From: Deidrevaladez@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:19:04 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,

Deidre Valadez

Westlake, OH 44145
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, EARL R. REFSLAND, certify that:

1. I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of ALLIED HEALTHCARE
PRODUCTS, INC.

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) omitted as not yet applicable;

c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and

d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.

Date: May 3, 2006


                                        /s/ EARL R. REFSLAND
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Earl. R. Refsland
                                        President & Chief Executive Officer
## D e p art m ent E nergy Washington, DC 20585 March 3, 1997 

### DATE CHANGE: PUBLIC HEARING- APRIL 1, 1997
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING AND PUBLIC HEARING ON TEST PROCEDURES AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR PLUMBING PRODUCTS; AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL APPLIANCES On February 20, 1997, the Department of Energy (DOE or Department) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Public Hearing Regarding Test Procedures and Certification Requirements for Plumbing Products; and Certification iRequiro+Y ent or Des:den + ; al n - --^ a1141l i

.J f or 1 \\..] 111e ,L.1 APPI1U11VeJ. (62 FR 7834, February 20, 1997). The comment period closes May 6, 1997. You recently received an invitation to this public hearing which was originally scheduled for March 31, 1997. Since a number of people have raised a concern about traveling on March 30, 1997, the Department has decided to change the date of the public hearing to April 1, 1997. The location of the hearing and the time remains the same. If you plan to attend the public hearing or have questions regarding the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, please contact Ms. Sandy Beall at (202) 586-7574 or Mr. Bill Hui at (202) 586- 9145, respectively. 

### TIME: April 1 , 1997 (9:00 a

. m. - 5:00 p.m.) PLACE: Department of Energy



### 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 1E-245 Washington , DC 20585 'CONTACT : Mr. Bill Hui

U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, EE-43 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 (202) 586- 9145 (202) 586-4617 (Fax)

MiL ae11. Mc a e, Director Office of Codes and Standards Building Technology, State and Community Programs Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Printed with soy ink on recycled paper