alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(R.D. 11554)

#### Kirk’s, Ltd. *v.*United States

Entry No. 893480.

(Decided June 27, 1968)

*John D. Bode*for tbe plaintiff.

*Edwin L. Weisl, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Beckwoeth, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement is before me on the following stipulation of counsel for the respective parties:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the parties hereto that the merchandise herein consists of zinc castings exported from Great Britain in December 1964 and that said merchandise is not on the list of products published in TD 54521; that there is no export or United States value for such or similar merchandise; that the sum of (1) the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing employed in producing such or similar merchandise at a time preceding the date of exportation of the merchandise undergoing appraisal which would ordinarily permit the production of that particular merchandise in the ordinary course of business, (2) the general expenses and profit equal to that usually reflected in sales of merchandise of the same general class or kind made by producers in Great Britain in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for shipment to the United States and (3) the cost of all containers and coverings and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States was as follows:

> Item Number

> 9440 (fork) Invoice units plus £208/-/- net packed

> 9430 (spoon) ” ” ” £208/-/- ” ”

> 9405 (snuffer) ” ” ” £304/-/- ” ”

> 9425 (ladle) ” ” ” £490/-/- ”

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeal herein be submitted for decision on this stipulation.

*917On the agreed facts, I find and hold that constructed value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, 70 Stat. 943, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise involved herein and that said values are:

> Item Number

> 9440 (fork) Invoice units plus £208/-/- net packed

> 9430 (spoon) “ “ “ £208/-/- “

> 9405 (snuffer) “ “ “ £304/-/- “

> 9425 (ladle) “ “ “ £490/-/- “

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
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 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

INTERNATIONAL, LLC, et al.,

Defendants,

 and

PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

PARTNERSHIP, et al.,

 Defendants Solely for Purposes 

 of Equitable Relief 

Case No. MS06-5002FDB

ORDER GRANTING ADDITIONAL

TIME TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS

This matter arises out of an action pending in the United States District Court, Northern

District of Texas, Dallas Division concerning individuals and entities placed in receivership in the

course of investigation of a fraudulent investment scheme. The moving parties herein, Robert and

Lea Lord, residents of Puyallup, Washington, are among the victims of the scheme. The Lords were

served a subpoena on January 30, 2006 to appear for a deposition Wednesday, February 8, 2006 in

Case 3:06-mc-05002-FDB Document 3 Filed 02/07/06 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 ORDER - 2

Seattle, Washington and to bring certain documents. The Lords note that there are deficiencies in

the subpoena under Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 (c)(3)(A), most notably, a failure to allow a reasonable time

for compliance. The Lords request that the subpoena be quashed allowing them to arrange a

mutually convenient time for the production and oral testimony, or alternatively that they be allowed

30 days to gather and review the requested information and records. The Receiver’s attorney

informs the Court that he has no objection to a 30-day extension of time to produce the documents.

The Lords also request reimbursement for the costs incurred to comply with the subpoenas, but the

Court declines to make such an award on this motion. 

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED: Motion of Robert and Lea Lord with request to the

subpoenas to appear and produce certain documents is GRANTED IN THE ALTERNATIVE: The

deposition may go forward, but the Lords shall have 30 days from the entry of this Order to gather

and produce the requested information and records. Requests for costs of compliance with the

subpoena is DENIED. 

DATED this 7th day of February, 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-mc-05002-FDB Document 3 Filed 02/07/06 Page 2 of 2
From: richardlhold@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:49:24 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 on moral grounds 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 consider to be immoral. 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,

Richard Holdener

Sun Prairie, WI 53590
ORDER FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

JUDGMENT - CV05-2140RSL - 1 

LAW OFFICES OF

RINEHART & ROBBLEE

=======================================================================================

1620 METROPOLITAN PARK BUILDING

1100 OLIVE WAY · SEATTLE, WA 98101 

(206) 467-6700 · FAX (206) 467-7589 

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

HON. ROBERT S. LASNIK 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

NORTHWEST SHEET METAL WORKERS 

ORGANIZATIONAL TRUST, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

ROOFING SERVICES, INC., 

Defendant. 

NO. CV05-2140RSL 

 ORDER FOR ENTRY OF 

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

The defendant failed to plead or otherwise defend in this action, his/its default having 

been entered by the clerk and the plaintiffs having moved the court without opposition for an 

order directing the entry of a default judgment supported by declaration and memorandum in 

support thereof; and the court having duly considered this matter: 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' motion for default judgment is granted and 

judgment by default shall be entered in favor of plaintiffs against defendant as follows: 

Case 2:05-cv-02140-RSL Document 12 Filed 05/04/06 Page 1 of 2
ORDER FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT 

JUDGMENT - CV05-2140RSL - 2 

LAW OFFICES OF

RINEHART & ROBBLEE

=======================================================================================

1620 METROPOLITAN PARK BUILDING

1100 OLIVE WAY · SEATTLE, WA 98101 

(206) 467-6700 · FAX (206) 467-7589 

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

1. Eighty-one Thousand, Eight Hundred, Forty-one and 11/100 Dollars ($81,841.11) 

in employee benefit contributions due for the period August 2005 to February 2006, inclusive, 

with interest at the rate of 12% per annum until paid; 

2. Eighteen Thousand, Three Hundred, Thirty-nine and 20/100 Dollars ($18,339.20) 

in liquidated damages for the period August 2005 through February 2006, inclusive, with interest 

at the rate 4.94% per annum until paid; 

3. Three Thousand, Seven Hundred, Thirty-four and 35/100 Dollars ($3,734.35) in 

pre-judgment interest through May 4, 2006 on August 2005 through February 2006 

contributions, with interest at the rate of 4.94% per annum until paid; 

4. Three Hundred, Sixty-two and 00/100 Dollars ($362.00) in costs, with interest at 

the rate of 4.94% per annum until paid; and 

5. Nine Hundred, Sixty-two and 50/100 Dollars ($962.50) in attorneys' fees, with 

interest at the rate of 4.94% per annum until paid. 

 United States District Judge

 Robert S. Lasnik 

DATED this 4th day of May, 2006. 

A

Case 2:05-cv-02140-RSL Document 12 Filed 05/04/06 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 660 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 19, 2007.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 2761) to extend the Terrorism Insurance Program of the Department of 
the Treasury, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived 
except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. General debate shall be 
confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Financial Services. After general debate the bill shall be considered for 
amendment under the five-minute rule. The amendment in the nature of a 
substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services now printed in the 
bill, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee 
on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the 
House and in the Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be 
considered as the original bill for the purpose of further amendment under the 
five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. All points of order against 
provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. Notwithstanding clause 11 of 
rule XVIII, no further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order 
except those printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules. Each 
further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be 
offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, 
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and 
controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, 
and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House 
or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such further 
amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. At 
the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
rise and report the bill, as amended, to the House with such further amendments 
as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered 
on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion 
except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
    Sec. 2.  During consideration in the House of H.R. 2761 pursuant to this 
resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the Chair 
may postpone further consideration of the bill to a time designated by the 
Speaker.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```