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

ORDER S 1

U.S. v. Long, CR05-396JCC

The Honorable John C. Coughenour

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

) NO. CR05-396JCC

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER GRANTING

) MOTIONS TO

BENJAMIN LONG, ) SEAL SENTENCING

) MEMORANDA 

Defendant. ) 

)

THIS MATTER having come before the Court on the motion of the plaintiff,

United States of America, to file its Sentencing Memorandum in this matter under seal

(Dkt. No. 116) and Defendant’s motion to file his Sentencing Memorandum in this matter

under seal (Dkt. No. 114); the Court, having reviewed the motions and the Sentencing

Memoranda, and being otherwise fully advised, finds and rules as follows:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the United States’ Sentencing Memorandum and

the Defendant’s Sentencing Memorandum shall remain sealed.

 DATED this 20th day of April, 2007. AJohn C. Coughenour

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cr-00396-JCC Document 123 Filed 04/20/07 Page 1 of 1
December 12, 1963

No. 68168.

Appeal 5149.

#### United States *v.*A. J. Van Dugteren & Sons, Inc.

Appeal dismissed October 18, 1963. Case remanded to the trial court for further proceedings not inconsistent with the decision therein of the appellate term, A.R.D. 154.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 188 (Friday, September 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 67254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21469]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XD424]


North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of web conference.

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

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) Social 
Science Planning Team (SSPT) will meet October 18, 2023.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Wednesday, October 18, 2023, from 2 
p.m. to 4 p.m., Alaska Time.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be a web conference. Join online through 
the link at https://meetings.npfmc.org/Meeting/Details/3010.
    Council address: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1007 W 
3rd Ave., Suite 400, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252; telephone: (907) 271-
2809. Instructions for attending the meeting via video conference are 
given under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Marrinan, Council staff; phone: 
(907) 271-2809; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c7b4a6b5a6afe9aaa6b5b5aea9a6a987a9a8a6a6e9a0a8b1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f18290839099df9c908383989f909fb19f9e9090df969e87">[email protected]</span></a>. For technical support, 
please contact our admin Council staff, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#86e8f6e0ebe5a8e7e2ebefe8c6e8e9e7e7a8e1e9f0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4e203e28232d602f2a2327200e20212f2f60292138">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Agenda

Wednesday, October 18, 2023

    The SSPT agenda will meet to elect a chair or co-chairs, discuss 
the upcoming research priority process and the requested SSPT 
engagement, and other business. The agenda is subject to change, and 
the latest version will be posted https://meetings.npfmc.org/Meeting/Details/3010 prior to the meeting, along with meeting materials.

Connection Information

    You can attend the meeting online using a computer, tablet, or 
smart phone, or by phone only. Connection information will be posted 
online at: https://meetings.npfmc.org/Meeting/Details/3010.

Public Comment

    Public comment letters will be accepted and should be submitted 
electronically to https://meetings.npfmc.org/Meeting/Details/3010.
    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: September 26, 2023.
Rey Israel Marquez,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National 
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-21469 Filed 9-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


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

JOHN KURTZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

CAPGEMINI AMERICA, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. C05-1817JLR

ORDER

This matter comes before the court upon Defendants’ Motion for Entry of

Judgment and Award of Costs and Fees (Dkt. # 25). The court has previously entered an

order granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 24). 

Defendants base their claim for fees on the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 505

(“section 505”), and for costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1919. Section 505 vests the court with

discretion to award fees.

In Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc., 510 U.S. 517, 534-35, n.19 (1994), the Court provides

a non-exclusive list of factors to be considered by a court exercising its discretion in

awarding fees. These factors include frivolousness, motivation, objective factual and

legal unreasonableness, compensation and deterrence. Applying these factors to the facts

and legal theories of this action, the court finds that an award of fees and costs would not

further the purposes of the Copyright Act. 

Case 2:05-cv-01817-JLR Document 30 Filed 02/28/06 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

The court therefore DENIES Defendants’ motion to the extent it seeks an award of

fees and costs, and GRANTS the motion for entry of judgment. The clerk is directed to

enter judgment of dismissal without prejudice in this matter.

Dated this 28th day of February, 2006.

A 

JAMES L. ROBART

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01817-JLR Document 30 Filed 02/28/06 Page 2 of 2
Before the Second Division,

February 26, 1962

No. 66500.

#### Ardalt, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 61/4296 (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

Since the protest was filed more than 60 days after liquidation, it was dismissed as untimely, by virtue of section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.
Case 2:06-cv-00045-RSM Document 98 Filed 11/06/08 Page 1 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00045-RSM Document 98 Filed 11/06/08 Page 2 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00045-RSM Document 98 Filed 11/06/08 Page 3 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00045-RSM Document 98 Filed 11/06/08 Page 4 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00045-RSM Document 98 Filed 11/06/08 Page 5 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00045-RSM Document 98 Filed 11/06/08 Page 6 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00045-RSM Document 98 Filed 11/06/08 Page 7 of 7
From: blessedlady59@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:55:32 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,

Lou Ann Bullock

Keo, AR 72083
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 11


                    FILENE'S BASEMENT CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 STATEMENTS RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                Twenty-Six Weeks Ended       Thirteen Weeks Ended
                               ------------------------    ------------------------
                               August 2,      August 3,     August 2,     August 3,
                                  1997          1996          1997          1996
                               ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------

<S>                            <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>       
Weighted average number
  of common shares
  outstanding                  20,674,946    20,507,120    20,727,311    20,513,651

Assumed exercise of stock
  options net of treasury
  shares deemed to have
  been repurchased at
  average market price
  for the period                  713,190       129,599       641,927       448,042
                               ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------
Weighted average
  primary shares
  outstanding                  21,388,136    20,636,719    21,369,238    20,961,693


Assumed exercise of
  stock options net of
  treasury shares deemed to
  have been repurchased
  at the end of the
  period market price                  --       314,043            --        20,014
                               ----------    ----------    ----------    ----------


Weighted average shares
  outstanding                  21,388,136    20,950,762    21,369,238    20,981,707
                               ==========    ==========    ==========    ==========
</TABLE>
No. 63841.

protests 301688-K, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### Castelazo & Associates, Inc., and K. & C. Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of rattan flower cages the same in all material, respects as those the subject of *Quon Quon Company*v. *United States*(41 Cust. Ct. 181, C.D. 2039), except that the merchandise involved herein consists of cages, composed wholly or in chief value of rattancore, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained. Abstract 59235 followed.
From: llugenereece@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:26:34 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,

Linda Reece

Boise, ID 83705
* Pursua nt to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit



## FILED

September 1, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-10121

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RICHARD BRANDON SUMMERS,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(6:03-CR-42-2-C)

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Richard Brandon Summers appeals his conviction and sentence

for being a felon in possession of a firearm and possessing a

firearm with an obliterated serial number. Summers pleaded guilty

but reserved the right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress

evidence obtained at a traf fic stop of the car in which he was

riding and the right to appeal an incorrect application of the

s entencing guidelines. Summers contends that the stop was

unjustified in its inception and was unlawfully ext ended in its2

scope; he also contends that he should have received an additional

one point reduction for acceptance of responsibility.

The district court did not commit clear error by believing the

testimony of the arresting officer that he stopped the car because

of the driver’s failure to signal before turning. Hence, the

traffic stop was justified at its inception. See Whren v. United

States

, 517 U.S. 806, 810 (1996) (stop is reasonable if police have

probable cause to believe traffic violation has occurred); United

States v. Garza

, 118 F.3d 278, 283 (5th Ci r. 1997) (deferring to

district court’s findings as to credibility of witnesses), c ert.

denied sub nom. Innocenio v. United States , 522 U.S. 1051 (1998).

Nor was the scope of the stop unlawfully extended. There was

“additional articulable, reasonable suspicion” for the detention.

See United States v. Valadez , 267 F.3d 395, 398 (5th Cir. 2001).

The officer was writing a citation to the vehicle’s driver, James

Baird, for failure to provide adequate proof of insurance. S ee

United States v. Shabazz

, 993 F.2d 431, 437 (5th Cir. 1993)

(officer may request insurance papers and issue cita tion). The

officers also had a reasonable suspicion about Summers’ identity.

Unlike the driver, Summers did not produce a driver’s license or

other photographic identification. Summers was riding in a car

registered to Raymond Turner, and a man by that name was wanted on

a felony arrest warrant.3

Summers received a two- l evel reduction for acceptance of

responsibility under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a) but contends that he

should have received an additional reduction under U.S.S.G. §

3E1.1(b). No reduction under that subpart is allowed unless the

Government moves for one; it did not do so. U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b)

and comment. (n.6).

AFFIRMED
# SEYFARTH... ,

SHAW , ATTORNEY S 

### ERuRTMENTO F

" . h > . : 0 n Writer' s direc t ption e (312)460-597 6 Writer' s e-mai

l dflynn@seyfarth.co m 

### ; ..Xh TOPERATION S



### • mHA R- U P

### ! : U ' 13 1 Soutf i Dearbor n Stree t Suit e 240 0 Chicago , Illinoi s 6060 3 (312)460-500 0 fa x(312 ) 460-700 0 WWW . seyfartti . co m February 17 , 201 1 VI A FACSIMIL E(202 ) 366-753 6 & U.S . MAI L" ] Th e Honorabl e Richar dC . Goodwi n _r ^ , Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 ' " - " ' ' - '''• ' U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloor , Roo mEl2-32 0 Washington , D C 2059 0 Re : Hajoc aWaterworks , FA A Cas e No . 2010SW70011 3 ^(Lf/ti5\ » OO I S Dea r Judg e Goodwin : ' Th e partie s hav e reache dasettlemen t agreemen t

i n thi s matter . Hajoc aWaterwork s therefor e withdraw s it s Reques t for aHearing , date dNovembe r 29 , 2010 , an drequest s that thi s matte r b e dismisse dwithprejudic e pursuan t t o 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.215 . : • • Pleas e le t

u s kno w i f

yo u nee dan y additiona l information .

Very trul y yours , SEYFART H S I Danie l R . Flyn n DRF:pe p cc : Hearin g Docke t

Clerk , AGC-430 , Federa l Aviatio nAdministratio n Jame s Archie r

• • : ^ Sharily nChristianse n Eri c E : Boy d' : . ' :

13149224V. 1 THI S I.ETTERHE.AD I S PRINTE D O N RCCVtLE D STOC K(£ #
Before the Second Division,

October 31, 1963

No. 68067.

#### Seedman International Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 62/14561 and 62/14563 (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 CCPA 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 244 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                        March 14, 2007.
    Resolved,

SECTION 1. ELECTION OF MEMBERS TO JOINT COMMITTEE ON PRINTING AND JOINT 
              COMMITTEE OF CONGRESS ON THE LIBRARY.

    (a) Joint Committee on Printing.--The following Members are hereby elected 
to the Joint Committee on Printing, to serve with the chair of the Committee on 
House Administration:
            (1) Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania.
            (2) Mr. Capuano.
            (3) Mr. Ehlers.
            (4) Mr. McCarthy of California.
    (b) Joint Committee of Congress on the Library.--The following Members are 
hereby elected to the Joint Committee of Congress on the Library, to serve with 
the chair of the Committee on House Administration:
            (1) Ms. Zoe Lofgren of California.
            (2) Mr. Ehlers.
            (3) Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
No. 57021.

petition 6919-R (Baltimore).

#### Timothy F. McGee *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The petitioner testified that prior to shipment of the merchandise he obtained information in the country of exportation to the effect that the invoice value would be acceptable for appraisement purposes in this country. Before arrival of the merchandise at the port of entry, petitioner consulted customs officials and was advised of the value at which the lilies would be appraised. When the merchandise was appraised at a value that exceeded the invoice and entered value, petitioner filed an appeal for reappraisement. However, the appeal was not prosecuted because petitioner discontinued his importing business due to difficulties with the foreign shipper. On the record presented it was held that there was not intent to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 42-3 Filed 11/03/2006 Page 1 of 2

Gordon v. Virtumundo Inc et al Doc. 42 Att. 2

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 42-3 Filed 11/03/2006 Page 2 of 2
No. 67561.

#### Manca, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 61/3275 (New York).

Opinion by

Oliveb, O.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of mercury vapor lamps used for illuminating purposes, composed wholly or in chief value of iron or steel, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Petition for	Exemption 14 CFR	§ 11.81

Exemption	petition under 14	CFR	section	21	(§§	21.171	-	21.199) and SEC 333

Your name	and mailing address.	 You	may	include	other contact information such	as a	fax	

number, telephone	number, or email address:	

Name: Donald	Lee	

Address: 22705	NE	Mountain	View	Ct.	Ridgefield,	WA	98642	

Phone:	360-474-7366	

Email: donlee98@yahoo.com

Description	of	the	aircraft	make(s),	model(s),	and	type(s)(i.e.	-	fixed-wing,	rotorcraft,	lighterthan-air)	of	the	DJI	Phantom	Series	that	you	intend	to	use	for	your	operation.		The	

description(s)	should	include	the	maximum	weight	(including	payload).	

**All	Aircraft	will	be	flown	at	the	specs	listed	below	as	maximum	weight	(including	payload):	

1. DJI	Phantom	2	
2.				DJI	Inspire	1