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 

MOTION AND ORDER TO REVISE SCHEDULING ORDER - 1 

Northwest Law Center, PLLC 

601 Union Square, Ste.2325 

Seattle, WA 98101 

(206) 652-5999/FAX (206) 652-5952

THE HONORABLE MARSHA J. PECHMAN 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE

ALEJANDRO MENCHU, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

AMERICAN DYNASTY, et al., 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 2:06-cv-154 

MOTION AND ORDER TO REVISE 

SCHEDULING ORDER 

1. This motion is filed on an emergency basis to protect the rights of plaintiffs in this litigation. 

2. New counsel in this matter has not been approved by plaintiff and therefore currently makes 

this appearance only to preserve the rights of the plaintiffs due to the fact that today it was 

learned that their counsel Paul Hernandez, WSBA #21015 has been suspended from the 

practice of law. 

3. If plaintiff does not approve of new counsel, Héctor Steele Rojas will inform the court of 

such. 

4. Counsel requests an extension of 45 days in this matter so that appropriate discussions with 

plaintiff and defendants can occur and the matters resolved in accordance with plaintiff’s 

wishes. 

Case 2:06-cv-00154-MJP Document 7 Filed 06/07/06 Page 1 of 3
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 

MOTION AND ORDER TO REVISE SCHEDULING ORDER - 2 

Northwest Law Center, PLLC 

601 Union Square, Ste.2325 

Seattle, WA 98101 

(206) 652-5999/FAX (206) 652-5952

Dated this 1st day of June 2006. 

NORTHWEST LAW CENTER, PLLC 

By: s/ Héctor Steele Rojas

Héctor Steele Rojas, WSBA #29916 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Northwest Law Center, PLLC 

601 Union Street, Suite 2325 

Seattle, WA 98101 

Telephone: (206) 652-5999 

Facsimile: (206) 652-5952 

Email: steelerojas@nwlawcenter.net

 

Case 2:06-cv-00154-MJP Document 7 Filed 06/07/06 Page 2 of 3
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 

MOTION AND ORDER TO REVISE SCHEDULING ORDER - 3 

Northwest Law Center, PLLC 

601 Union Square, Ste.2325 

Seattle, WA 98101 

(206) 652-5999/FAX (206) 652-5952

ORDER 

Upon consideration of plaintiff’s motion to extend the scheduling order in this matter for 45 days is 

so ORDERED this __7th__day of_____June________, 2006. 

__/s Marsha J. Pechman________ 

Honorable Marsha J. Pechman 

U.S. District Judge 

Presented by: 

NORTHWEST LAW CENTER, PLLC 

s/ Héctor Steele Rojas____________

Héctor Steele Rojas, WSBA #29916 

Case 2:06-cv-00154-MJP Document 7 Filed 06/07/06 Page 3 of 3
From: donnellyam@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:42:53 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,

Anne [Nancy] Donnelly

Trenton, NJ 08691
No. 56792.

#### Jay Thorpe, Inc., and W. J. Byrnes Co. of N. Y., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 178798-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of bags in chief value of beads, not ornamented with beads, similar in all material respects to those the classification of which was involved in Abstract 56124, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: njgray16@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:20:17 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,

Nancy Gray

Yadkinville, NC 27055
No. 62305.

#### D. Strauss Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 38536-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *E. C. Carter & Son, Inc.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 368, C. D. 1889), the items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, prior to January 1, 1948, were held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 1529 (a), as modified by the trade agreement with France (T. D. 48346), and those entered, or withdrawn from warehouse subsequent to said date, were held dutiable at 35 percent under said paragraph, as modified by T. D. 51802.
EXHIBIT 23.1











CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




To the Board of Directors


Entertainment Art, Inc.


(A Development Stage Company)


El Dorado Hills, CA





We hereby consent to the inclusion in this form 10-K, Annual Report pursuant to section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of our report dated June 1, 2012 relating to the financial statements of Entertainment Art, Inc. as of and for the year ended March 31, 2012.


/s/ ZS Consulting Group LLP


Melville, New York


June 19 , 2012





115 Broad Hollow Road, Suite 350     Melville, New York 11747
 Tel: (516) 394-3344     Fax:  (516) 908-7867
 www.zmscpas.com
No. 60551.

#### Samuel Shapiro & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 291308-K (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

There being nothing before the court tending in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the classification by the collector, the protest was overruled.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 69212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22097]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special 
Emphasis Panel; Pathogenic Mechanisms Influencing Blood Brain 
Barrier Function in HIV and Substance Use Disorders.
    Date: November 8, 2023.
    Time: 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug 
Abuse, 301 North Stonestreet Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual 
Meeting).
    Contact Person: Caitlin Moyer, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, 301 
North Stonestreet Avenue, MSC 6021, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 443-
4577, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7f1c1e160b131611511210061a0d3f11161751181009"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e380828a978f8a8dcd8e8c9a8691a38d8a8bcd848c95">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.277, Drug 
Abuse Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, Scientist 
Development Awards, and Research Scientist Awards; 93.278, Drug 
Abuse National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 
93.279, Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 29, 2023.
Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-22097 Filed 10-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THE
NOTES THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           8,658
<SECURITIES>                                    37,774
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,369
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                57,064
<PP&E>                                          21,369
<DEPRECIATION>                                (14,756)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  63,677
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,379
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                      42,960
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    63,677
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,325
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                14,538
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 171
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,675)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,675)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,675)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.38)
        

</TABLE>
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 UNSEALING 

GOVERNMENT'S MOTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARD FABEL, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. CR06-041L

ORDER UNSEALING

GOVERNMENT’S MOTION

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. On March 10, 2006, the government

submitted under seal the “Government’s Uncontested Motion in Support of Motion for

Discovery Protective Order” (Dkt. # 54-1) and its “Proposed Temporary Protective Order” (Dkt.

# 54-2). Upon review of the contents of the motion and proposed order, the Court concludes

that the order was improperly sealed, because the public’s right of access outweighs the interests

of the public and parties in protecting the files from public review. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that documents numbered 54-1 and 54-2 be UNSEALED.

DATED this 14th day of March, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cr-00041-RSL Document 60 Filed 03/14/06 Page 1 of 1
No. P67/319.

#### Gold Win Tool & Hardware Co. *v.*United States, protest 66/60957 (New York).

Rao, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of brass hose nozzles similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Lipman's*(52 CCPA 59, C.A.D. 859), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, David E. Schreiman, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of SPARTA, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-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)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation; andc)
    
    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 (the registrants fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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 officer 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 over financial reporting
which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting. May 11, 2004 /s/ David E. SchreimanDavid E. SchreimanChief Financial Officer
| Skip to Content*Release Date: March 6, 2014*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.214 Mutual Fund Shares 1** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
No. P66/251. —

#### Chadwick-Miller Importers, Inc. *v.*United States, protest 61/18642 (Boston).

Rao, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by -the foregoing protest consists of battery-operated mixers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *F. B. Vandegrift & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(53 Cust. Ct. 231, Abstract 68674), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: TheJuneau gold belt, Alaska**
 
Report | Plates: 3637
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:287
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000957552
 
July 25, 2018
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 MINUTE ORDER – 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

JAMES S. GORDON, Jr., a married individual,

d/b/a ‘GORDONWORKS.COM’; OMNI

INNOVATIONS, LLC., a Washington limited

liability company,

Plaintiffs,

v.

VIRTUMUNDO, INC., a Delaware corporation,

d/b/a ADNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM;

ADKNOWLEDGE, INC., a Delaware

corporation, d/b/a AKNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM;

SCOTT LYNN, an individual; and JOHN DOES,

1–X,

Defendants.

CASE NO. C06-204JCC

MINUTE ORDER

The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable John C. 

Coughenour, United States District Judge:

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Seal (Dkt. No. 123) portions of

documents in the record. In this Court’s May 15, 2007 Order (Dkt. No. 121), the Court denied

Plaintiffs’ motion to seal the Declaration of Derek Newman (Dkt. No. 101) (May 15, 2007 Order

21:13–23), Defendants’ motion to seal a reply brief and its exhibit (Dkt. Nos. 92 and 93) (May 15, 2007

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 141 Filed 07/19/07 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 MINUTE ORDER – 2

Order 21:24–22:6), and Defendants’ motion to seal a motion and its exhibits (Dkt. Nos. 87 and 88) (May

15, 2007 Order 22:7–12). The Clerk was directed to unseal Dkt. Nos. 87, 88, 92, and 93, while Dkt. No.

101 remained unsealed. 

Plaintiffs have now filed a motion to seal three of these documents (Dkt. Nos. 88, 93, and 101)

and to replace them with versions containing limited redactions (see Exs. A, B, and C to the instant

motion, respectively). The Court finds that Plaintiffs’ requests, which are significantly narrower than the

previously denied requests to seal, meet the standard of Local Civil Rule CR 5(g), by narrowly tailoring

redactions to protect confidential information without concealing more information than necessary from

public view. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motion. The Clerk is hereby DIRECTED to

SEAL Dkt. Nos. 88, 93, and 101. Plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED to separately file on this Court’s

electronic docket the redacted replacements for those documents, such that the docket entry for the

redacted replacement for each sealed document or set of documents contains a link to the original, now

sealed, complete version of that document or set of documents. Plaintiffs must file these three

replacements within 7 court days of the date of this Minute Order.

DATED this 19th day of July, 2007.

BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk of Court

By /s/ C. Ledesma 

Deputy Clerk

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 141 Filed 07/19/07 Page 2 of 2