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 -1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, 

v.

MANUEL PEZEZ PEREZ, 

Defendant. 

CASE NO.CR05-5748RBL

 

 ORDER GRANTING 

 CONTINUANCE OF

 TRIAL DATE

Defendant Perez Perez moves to continue the trial date. The Government does not object to the

requested continuance. Co-Defendant Moises Gallardo Barragan is scheduled for a change of plea

before the Magistrate Judge. Counsel for Gallardo-Barragon has advised the clerk that if the plea

does not go forward they intend to join in the Motion to Continue. For these reasons, and the

reasons stated in the Declaration of Counsel, the motion is GRANTED and the Trial Date is

CONTINUED to November 6, 2006.

In view of the foregoing, the court finds and rules as follows:

1. Failure to grant a continuance in this matter would deny the defense the reasonable time

necessary for effective preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence. Title 18

U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). 

2. The ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the interest of the

public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Title 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A). The period of delay

resulting from this continuance from JULY 3, 2006 to NOVEMBER 6, 2006 is excluded for
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

speedy trial computation purposes under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B) as this is a

reasonable period of delay.

ACCORDINGLY:

The Jury Trial is CONTINUED to Monday, NOVEMBER 6, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. 

No Pretrial Conference is scheduled at this time.

The Motions Cutoff date is extended to SEPTEMBER 18, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of June, 2006. ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER -2
No. 59753.

#### L. Barbier *v.*United States,

protest 257897-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, 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.
# Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA

- 2013

- 1028

Directorate Identifier: 2013NM068AD

A71N001

- 12, R1

--- 8/9/12

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the

Supplemental AD Docket



### MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
| Skip to Content*Release Date: June 5, 2014*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.123 Government-Sponsored Enterprises 1** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
No. 66554.

#### Joseph H. Brown & Son *v.*United States,

protests 60/16381, etc. (El Paso).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of horsemeat similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 66197, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Case No. 8,838.

#### In re MACKAY.

[4 N. B. R. 67 (Quarto, 17).] 1

District Court, S. D. New York.

1870.

Bankruptcy — Discharge—Proper Books op Account.

Where discharge was refused bankrupt for failing to keep proper books of account.

[In the matter of John Maxwell Maekay, a bankrupt For prior proceedings in this case, see Case No. 8,837.]

T. C. F. Buckley, for creditor.

G. C. Barrett, for bankrupt

1

 [Reprinted by permission.]

BLATCHFORD, District Judge.

Having come to the conclusion, on the evidence, that the bankrupt was, in fact, as a merchant and trader, a member with John Murdock Mae-kay and John Neilson, of the copartnership firm of J. M. Maekay & Co., a discharge must be refused to him, for the reasons set forth for refusing discharges to those persons; the specifications in opposition to his discharge as a member of said firm, as a merchant and trader, being to the same effect as in respect to them, in regard to the keeping of proper books of account.
RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206

File Name: 08a0067p.06

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________

JEFFREY D. SLYMAN,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

CITY OF PIQUA; GRANT D. KERBER, in his individual

and official capacity as Director of Law (City of

Piqua),

 Defendants-Appellees.

X

-

-

-

-

>

,

-

-

-

-

-

N

No. 07-3468

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Ohio at Dayton.

No. 06-00006—Walter H. Rice, District Judge.

Argued: January 30, 2008

Decided and Filed: February 8, 2008 

Before: GUY, GILMAN, and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges.

_________________

COUNSEL

ARGUED: Elaine S. Bernstein, Dayton, Ohio, for Appellant. Robert J. Surdyk, SURDYK DOWD

& TURNER, Dayton, Ohio, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Elaine S. Bernstein, Dayton, Ohio, for

Appellant. Robert J. Surdyk, SURDYK DOWD & TURNER, Dayton, Ohio, for Appellee.

_________________

OPINION _________________

PER CURIAM. Plaintiff Jeffrey Slyman was appointed by defendant the City of Piqua as

an Assistant Law Director. When defendant Grant Kerber, Piqua’s then-Current Law Director and

plaintiff’s supervisor, discharged Slyman, Slyman sued, alleging identical procedural due process

violations against both Piqua and Kerber. The defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting

that plaintiff’s due process claims fail because he did not have a federally protected property interest

in continued employment. 

The district court agreed and granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff

filed this timely appeal. 

Having had the benefit of oral argument and having carefully considered the record on

appeal, we are not persuaded that a lengthy opinion is necessary. Accordingly, we AFFIRM for the

1
No. 07-3468 Slyman v. City of Piqua, et al. Page 2

reasons set forth in the well-reasoned opinion of the district court. See Slyman v. City of Piqua, 494

F. Supp. 2d 732 (S.D. Ohio. 2007).
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 709 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                     November 13, 2007.
Whereas Samuel Taliaferro Rayburn, affectionately known as ``Mr. Sam'', held the 
        position of Speaker of the House of Representatives for a record 
        seventeen and a half years; and
Whereas the legendary former Speaker of the House served twenty-four consecutive 
        terms as United States Representative of the Fourth District of Texas, 
        until his death in 1961: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives recognizes and honors the 50th 
anniversary of the dedication of the Sam Rayburn Library and Museum on October 
9, 2007, as well as completion of phase one of the museum restoration program, 
and also recognizes the many supporters and contributors whose efforts have 
helped maintain and improve the Library and Museum.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Exhibit
32.2
 Certification
of Principal Financial Officer
 Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31,
2009 (the “Report”) of United States Short Oil Fund, LP (the “Registrant”), as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Howard
Mah, the Chief Financial Officer of United States Commodity Funds LLC, General
Partner of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge,
that:
  (1) The
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 operations of the
Registrant.
  Date:
      May 24, 2010
                        By:

                  /s/
                    Howard MahName:
                        Howard
      MahTitle:
                        Chief
      Financial OfficerUnited
      States Commodity Funds LLC,General
      Partner of United States Short Oil Fund,
LP
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

CHARLES DEAN,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

)

)

)

)

) C05-1949 JCC

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, 

Commissioner of Social Security,

 

 Defendant.

)

)

) MINUTE ORDER

)

) REASSIGNING and REFERRING CASE

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 C05-1949 JCC and bear the Judge’s name in the upper right hand corner of

the document.

It appearing from the files and records herein that this is an appropriate

proceeding to refer to a full-time United States Magistrate Judge for the purposes

hereinafter set forth, pursuant to Local Rule MJR 4(A)(4) and as authorized by

Mathews, Secretary of HEW vs Weber, 432 US 261 (1976), now therefore,

Pursuant to the General Order entered by the Chief Judge on 30 April 2004, IT

IS ORDERED that the above entitled action is hereby referred to the Honorable James

P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge, who is directed and empowered to 

Case 2:05-cv-01949-JCC Document 9 Filed 02/10/06 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

Dated this 10th day of February, 2006

Bruce Rifkin, Clerk of Court

 /S/ PETER H. VOELKER

Peter H. Voelker, Deputy Clerk

review the administrative record, and to submit proposed findings and conclusions, and

recommended disposition. The procedure for review of those recommendations shall

be in accordance with FRCP 72(b) and with Local Rule MJR 4(c).

Case 2:05-cv-01949-JCC Document 9 Filed 02/10/06 Page 2 of 2
P.1 

OAR Box 1338 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

6) ll-E-17 

Docket Number: 

A-89-10 

Printed 6/17/2008 1:48:05 PM Sheet 6 of 105 
P.2 

CORPORATI O 

A-89-10 

II7E-I 7 

CONTACT REPORT li I 

Date g/c U ^, |??Q Originator 

*®im in 

ofe. 

CONTACT BY: TELEPHONE ^( MEETING • Other 

NAME, TITLE & ORGANIZATION g - h g _-^AiYN , 

# • ADDRESS & TELEPHONE NUMBER ^. W F^c •/*,._, J/. 

PURPOSE OR SUBJECT (Give project number if appropriate) 

Cost-S p-f Si^K I W JWljk ,/Hakcurcoi /u^-; jecj 

SUMMARY 

Ctt/\ 

ACTION 

i 

Distribution:
No. 56782.

#### M. W. Zack Metal Company et al. *v.*United States,

protests 151521-K, etc. (Detroit).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of a zinc die-casting alloy similar in all material respects to the product passed upon in *M. W. Zack Metal Company*v. *United States*(26 Cust. Ct. 91, C. D. 1306), which the court held to be classifiable under paragraph 397 as articles in chief value of zinc, not specially provided for. However, inasmuch as the plaintiff in the cited case did not claim classification under paragraph 397, the protest therein was overruled without affirming the collector’s classification. On the record presented herein, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
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

SLIMAN FARRAN and FADUL FARRAN

dba JERUSALEM CAFÉ and JERUSALEM

RESTAURANT and CAFE,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JIMI ABDULLAH JOUZINE,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5116FDB

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’

EMERGENCY MOTION FOR

SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS

UNDER SEAL FOR IN CAMERA

REVIEW ONLY

Plaintiffs move for an order sealing certain recipes that are submitted in a sealed envelope for

in camera review by the Court. Plaintiffs argue that the submitted recipes constitute trade secrets

that Defendant misappropriated. Plaintiffs also state that they intend to negotiate with Defense

counsel for a stipulated protective order allowing for “attorneys eyes only” review of the recipes and

other trade secrets in this case. 

Defendant opposes the motion arguing that such submission is unfair and uncalled for

because filing the documents under seal prevents defense counsel from comparing Plaintiffs’ recipes

with those used by the Defendant at the Galilee Café. Ex parte submissions of evidence on the merits

is not generally allowed. See, e.g., Application of Eisenberg, 654 F.2d 1107, 1112 (5th Cir. 1981). 

Case 3:06-cv-05116-FDB Document 45 Filed 04/04/06 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

Moreover, Defendant asserts that Defense counsel offered on March 17, 2006 to stipulate to a

protective order, but Plaintiffs refused. 

Defendants objections are well taken. The Plaintiffs’ Motion for a temporary restraining

order and a preliminary injunction has already been denied without reference to the recipes

themselves, but noting that the requisite behavior for protecting asserted trade secrets had not been

shown. 

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED: Plaintiffs’ Emergency Motion for Submission of

Documents under Seal for In Camera Review Only [Dkt. # 37] is DENIED. 

DATED this 4th day of April, 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05116-FDB Document 45 Filed 04/04/06 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7480

TAMMY LYNN MOORE, a/k/a Tammy Lynn ScottSmith,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JAMES N. LILLER, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief

District Judge. (CA-97-368)

Submitted: March 17, 1998 Decided: April 30, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tammy Lynn Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Scott E. Johnson, OFFICE OF

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appelant seeks to appeal the district court's judgment ordersl

denying relief on her petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & Supp. 1997), and her post-judgment motions filed under Fed.

R. Civ. P. 59(e) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6). We have reviewed the

record and the district court's judgment order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the

appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Moore v. Liller, No.

CA-97-368 (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 3 & Sept. 16, 1997). We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
From: Andrew Pilskalns

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:41:07 PM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

Andrew Pilskalns
Bozeman, Montana
No. 67594.

#### Rice Barton Corporation *v.*United States,

protest 61/18649 (Boston).

*264Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance witb stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 66225, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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 1

On April 24, 2006, the order declining to serve was returned. Dkt. No. 8. On May 18,

2006, the Clerk inquired with officials at plaintiff’s institution of record and learned that he had

escaped. Thus, it is unlikely that plaintiff will amend his complaint. 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

PAGE -1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

KEVIN GREGORY JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

KING COUNTY, et al.,

Defendants.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C06-279-MJP-JPD

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in his attempt to bring this 42

U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights claim against the Washington State Department of Corrections and

more than a dozen named and unnamed individuals and entities associated with the King

County Regional Justice Center. On April 13, 2006, the Court declined to serve plaintiff’s

complaint because it failed to state adequate constitutional claims. Dkt. No. 7. The Court,

however, explained the deficiencies to plaintiff and gave him thirty days to amend the

complaint. Id. To date, plaintiff has failed to amend the complaint.1

 Having carefully

considered the record, the Court ORDERS as follows:

(1) The case is DISMISSED without prejudice.

Case 2:06-cv-00279-MJP Document 11 Filed 05/22/06 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

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

PAGE -2

(2) The clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to plaintiff and to United

States Magistrate Judge James P. Donohue.

Dated this 22nd day of May, 2006.

A

Marsha J. Pechman

United States District Judge

Recommended for entry 

this 19th day of May, 2006.

/s/ JAMES P. DONOHUE 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00279-MJP Document 11 Filed 05/22/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 63843.

protest 220489-K (Detroit).

#### John V. Carr & Son, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the merchandise identified on the commercial invoices as “2” x %” ” and *“1%"- x U" ”*consists of copper rods similar in all material respects to those the subject of *H. J. Van Der Ryn, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(40 Cust. Ct. 90, C.D. 1964), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         656 
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                13786 
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (1069)
<INVENTORY>                                  17043 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              1211 
<PP&E>                                       33613 
<DEPRECIATION>                              (18459)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               74896 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        10704 
<BONDS>                                      15960 
<COMMON>                                       101 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                   48745 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 74896 
<SALES>                                      17092 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             17092 
<CGS>                                       (13669)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               (13669)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (6024)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (89)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (444)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (3051)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (1139)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (1912)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (1912)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 (.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0
        

</TABLE>