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

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

CALVIN ROUSE,

Plaintiff,

v.

DOUG WADDINGTON et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5183RJB

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO AMEND 

This civil rights action has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to Title 28

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Before the court is plaintiff’s motion to file a second amended complaint (Dkt. #

25).

Plaintiff was given leave to file an amended complaint and he did so August 28, 2006 (Dkt. 19). 

On November 9, 2006 the court entered an order directing service of the amended complaint (Dkt. # 24). 

On November 20, 2006 plaintiff asked for leave to file a second amended complaint and add two

new defendants. No proposed second amended complaint accompanies the motion (Dkt. # 25). Counsel

entered an appearance on behalf of two of the named defendants on December 13, 2006 (Dkt. # 26).

The court will not consider the motion to amend without a proposed second amended complaint

before it. The proposed second amended complaint would act as a complete substitute for the amended

complaint if accepted. Plaintiffs motion is inadequate without the proposed substitute complaint.

The court orders plaintiff to submit a proposed second amended complaint with a new motion to

amend if he wishes the court to consider the motion. Plaintiff should note the motion for the third Friday

after service and all further motions or court papers must be served on defense counsel. The current

Case 3:06-cv-05183-RJB Document 27 Filed 12/18/06 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

Page - 2

motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff and counsel for defendants a copy of this Order.

DATED this 18, day of December, 2006.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05183-RJB Document 27 Filed 12/18/06 Page 2 of 2
July 19, 1954

No. 58291.

Suit 4768.

#### Marianao Sugar Trading Corp. *v.*United States.

C. D. 1481 affirmed March 23, 1954. C. A. D. 557.
No. 53297.

protests 143894-K (B), etc. (New York).

#### J. W. Hampton, Jr., & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
(R.D. 11549)

#### Northrup, King *&*Company *v.*United States

Entry Nos. De-206605; 209996.

(Decided June 20, 1968)

*Glad, é Tuttle*for the plaintiff.

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

Watson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation entered into between counsel for the respective parties herein.

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, as follows:

> 1. That the appeals for reappraisement enumerated on Schedule “A” attached hereto cover Peat Moss Pots exported from Ireland during June and July of 1965.

> 2. That the merchandise involved herein does not appear on the final list (T.D. 54521) proclaimed by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 T.D. 54165 and published in T.D. 54521.

> 3. That at the time of exportation to the United States of the merchandise involved herein such merchandise was freely sold or in the absence of sales freely offered for sale to all purchasers for exportation to the United States in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordi*913nary course of trade at the invoiced prices, less ocean freight, and less 1 *y2*per cent, net packed.

> 4. That the said appeals for reappraisement are submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold export value, as that value is defined in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, T.D. 54165, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such value for the merchandise covered by these appeals were the invoiced prices, less ocean freight, and less 1 *y2*percent, net packed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
Before the Third Division,

September 30, 1959

No. 63405.

protest 310746-K/14790 (New Orleans).

#### International Distributing Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is a product of West Germany, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 14

Affirming certain findings of the President of the United States with regard

to programs concerning international family planning.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 4, 1997

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) (by request), introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee

on Appropriations for not to exceed 5 calendar days pursuant to section

518A(a) of Public Law 104–208

JOINT RESOLUTION

Affirming certain findings of the President of the United

States with regard to programs concerning international

family planning.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the House of Representatives and Senate approve

4 the Presidential finding, submitted to Congress on Janu5 ary 31, 1997, that the limitation on obligations imposed

6 by section 518A(a) of the Foreign Operations, Export Fi7 nancing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1997,
2

SJ 14 IS

1 is having a negative impact on the proper functioning of

2 the population planning program.

Æ
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NORA KENNEY, *

* No. 11

- 363V

Petitioner, * Special Master Christian J. Moran

*

v. *

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Filed: February 22 , 2016

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

* Attorneys’ fees and costs

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Ronald C

. Homer

, Conway, Homer & Chin

- Caplan, P.C.

, Boston, MA , for

petitioner;

Debra A. Filteau Begley , United States Dep ’ t of Justice, Washington, DC, for

respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION AWARDING

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS 1

Nora Kenney was denied compensation through the National Childhood

Vaccine Injury Act, 42 U.S.C. §300 a a

— 10 through 34 (2012). Decision , issued

Jan . 1 6 , 2015

. Previously, she was awarded attorneys’ fees and costs on an interim

basis based up on a stipulation. Decision , issued Nov. 18, 2014

. Sh e now seeks an

award of final attorneys’ fees and costs. Sh e is a warded $ 4

, 487

. 65

.

* * *

The present case is similar to other recently decided cases involving the law

firm representing this petitioner. In short, the parties did not agree to a reasonable

1 The E

- Government Act, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and

Promotion of Electronic Government Services) , requires that the Court post this decision on its

website. Pursuant to Vacc ine Rule 18(b), the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing

redaction of medical information or other information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

- 12(d)(4).

Any redactions ordered by the special master will appear in the document posted on the website.2

hourly rate for the attorneys representing petitioners in the Vaccine Program and

the dispute led to litigation. For a more complete recitation of events, see

McCulloch v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs. , No. 09

- 293V, 2015 WL 5634323

(Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Sept. 1, 2015) and Avchen v. Sec’y of Health & Human

Servs. , No. 14

- 279V , 2015 WL 9595415 (Fed. Cl. Spec. Mstr. Dec. 4, 2015).

M s

. Kenney presently requests an award of $ 4

, 901.00 in attorneys’ fees and

$22.65 in attorneys’ costs. The Secretary’s remaining objection concerns the

amount of time the attorneys spent.

The Secretary’s objection that work performed by multiple attorneys

duplicated the work the primary attorney performed is well founded . This re sults

in a deduction of $ 436

. 0 0

.

Ms

. Kenney is awarded $ 4,487.65 in attorneys’ fees and costs. This shall be

paid as follows:

$ 4,487

. 65 representing attorneys’ fees and costs. The award shall be

in the form of a check made payable jointly to petit ioner and

petitioner’s attorney, Ronald Homer

, of Conway , Homer & Chin

Caplan , in the amount of $4,487.65

.

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC Appendix B, the

clerk of the court is directed to enter judgment herewith.

Any questions may be directed to my law clerk, Shannon Proctor , at

(202) 357

- 63 60

.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master
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

DETENTION ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W. D. OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

BRANDOM LEMARK ESTRADA,

 Defendant.

Case No. 06-5048M

DETENTION ORDER

THE COURT, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3142, finds that no condition or combination

of conditions which defendant can meet will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and/or the safety of any

other person and the community.

This finding is based on 1) the nature and circumstances of the offense(s) charged, including whether the offense is a

crime of violence or involves a narcotic drug; 2) the weight of the evidence against the person; 3) the history and characteristics of

the person including those set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(3)(A)(B); and 4) the nature and seriousness of the danger release would

impose to any person or the community.

Findings of Fact/ Statement of Reasons for Detention

Presumptive Reasons/Unrebutted:

 ( ) Conviction of a Federal offense involving a crime of violence. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(A)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(B)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of 10+ years as prescribed in the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.§801 et seq.), the

Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C.§951 et seq.) Or the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (46

U.S.C. App. 1901 et seq.)

 ( ) Convictions of two or more offenses described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(1) of two or more

State or local offenses that would have been offenses described in said subparagraphs if a circumstance giving rise to

Federal jurisdiction had existed, or a combination of such offenses.

Safety Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant is currently on probation/supervision resulting from a prior offense.

 ( ) Defendant was on bond on other charges at time of alleged occurrences herein.

 ( ) Defendant’s prior criminal history.

Flight Risk/Appearance Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant’s lack of sufficient ties to the community.

 ( ) Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer.

 ( ) Detainer(s)/Warrant(s) from other jurisdictions.

 ( ) Failures to appear for past court proceedings.

 ( ) Past conviction for escape.

Other:

 (/) Defendant stipulated to detention without prejudice

 

Order of Detention

< The defendant shall be committed to the custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility

separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal.

< The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel.

< The defendant shall on order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, be delivered

to a United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding.

 March 10, 2006.

___s/ Karen L. Strombom_______________

Karen L Strombom, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cr-05205-FDB Document 9 Filed 03/10/06 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 REPORT FILED
ON FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,591,958
<ALLOWANCES>                                   497,586
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            15,751,021
<PP&E>                                      13,202,464
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,696,128
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              57,136,333
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       15,724,036
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       24,902,593
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        72,059
<OTHER-SE>                                     656,444
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                57,136,333
<SALES>                                     13,871,234
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            13,871,234
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               23,102,399
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             112,846
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (9,344,011)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.20)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.20)


</TABLE>
No. 68173.

#### Elancee Trading Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 63/6303 (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

An examination of the official papers in the case showing that the protest was filed more than 60 days after liquidation, it was dismissed as untimely, by virtue of section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.
[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: Geologyand mineral resources of northwestern Alaska**
 
Report | Plates: 0102
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:815
Item Number:
CGP systemNumber:
 
May 15, 2018
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 13

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States which

requires (except during time of war and subject to suspension by the

Congress) that the total amount of money expended by the United

States during any fiscal year not exceed the amount of certain revenue

received by the United States during such fiscal year and not exceed

20 per centum of the gross national product of the United States during

the previous calendar year.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 28, 1997

Mr. SHELBY introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice

and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States which requires (except during time of war and

subject to suspension by the Congress) that the total

amount of money expended by the United States during

any fiscal year not exceed the amount of certain revenue

received by the United States during such fiscal year

and not exceed 20 per centum of the gross national

product of the United States during the previous calendar year.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-
2

•SJ 13 IS

1 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the follow2 ing article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitu3 tion of the United States, to be valid only if ratified by

4 the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States with5 in seven years of the date of final passage of this joint

6 resolution:

7 ‘‘ARTICLE —

8 ‘‘SECTION 1. The total amount of money expended

9 by the United States in any fiscal year shall not exceed

10 the total amount of revenue received by the United States

11 during such fiscal year, except revenue received from the

12 issuance of bonds, notes, or other obligations of the United

13 States.

14 ‘‘SECTION 2. The total amount of money expended

15 by the United States in any fiscal year shall not exceed

16 the amount equal to 20 per centum of the gross national

17 product of the United States during the last calendar year

18 ending before the beginning of such fiscal year.

19 ‘‘SECTION 3. Sections 1 and 2 of this Article shall

20 not apply during any fiscal year during any part of which

21 the United States is at war as declared by the Congress

22 under section 8 of Article I of the Constitution.

23 ‘‘SECTION 4. Sections 1 and 2 of this Article may

24 be suspended by a concurrent resolution approved by a
3

•SJ 13 IS

1 three-fifths vote of the Members of each House of the Con2 gress. Any suspension of sections 1 and 2 of this Article

3 under this section shall be effective only during the fiscal

4 year during which such suspension is approved.

5 ‘‘SECTION 5. This Article shall take effect on the first

6 day of the first fiscal year beginning after the date of the

7 adoption of this Article.

8 ‘‘SECTION 6. The Congress shall have power to en9 force this Article by appropriate legislation.’’.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarter Report of Startech Environmental Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph
F. Longo, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.




By: /s/ Joseph F. Longo
-----------------------
    Joseph F. Longo
    Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President
    March 21, 2006




The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.
No. 56795.

#### Cuneo Brothers, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 179609-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

An examination of the record failing to disclose any evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption of the correctness attaching to the collector’s action, the jirotest was overruled.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

BULLETIN 1000 PLATE 14

DEPTH OF SOIL SAMPLE, IN FEET
cy

Co} 1000
L__3
ZINC, IN PARTS PER MILLION

16 0 500
tL __i
LEAD, IN PARTS PER MILLION

2
8

2
Sg
s

a
8

CONCENTRATIONS OF LEAD AND ZINC

IN PARTS PER MILLION
ae
8 8

8

AVERAGE LEAD AND ZINC IN RESIDUUM,

°
of

T T “ T
20 30 40 50 60 70 80 100 170 190 200 215 225 235 250 260 210 20 300
DISTANCE ALONG TRAVERSE, IN FEET

, Fe «280
*°270
EXPLANATION J Reo
7°" 9250
Zinc ‘ ‘ Fe
0 Fe 235
Lead _ ©225
Zinc and lead $215
Component of slope .
‘parallel to traverse +190
+170
PERCENT OF RESIDUAL Fe
MATERIAL IN SOIL

Less than 25 percent

Mf

Fe
, 25 to 50 percent #100

50 to 100 percent =. 2 80
70
| Pb Fe 2 80
#50

EXPLANATION

Area of lead mines and prospects
Symbols indicate unusual quantities of
elements containing 1ron or lead on thé surface

#100
Sample point and the
distance along traverse, in feet

9 50 Feet - oe
——— Direction and estimated amount
of land slope

MAP SHOWING THE RELATION OF THE SAMPLE POINTS
TO OLD LEAD MINES AND PROSPECTS

DISTRIBUTION OF LEAD AND ZINC IN SOIL NEAR POINT LIN THE POTOSI AREA

369614 O—86 (In pocket) No. 8
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               AUG-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  SEP-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    MAY-31-2000
<CASH>                                            3,456,554
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1,680,525
<ALLOWANCES>                                         39,000
<INVENTORY>                                       1,123,010
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  6,962,263
<PP&E>                                            2,530,792
<DEPRECIATION>                                    1,295,407
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   12,506,630
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               652,177
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             77,175
<OTHER-SE>                                       11,717,278
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     12,506,630
<SALES>                                           8,338,536
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  8,338,536
<CGS>                                             4,042,166
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     4,042,166
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   2,780,736
<INCOME-TAX>                                        870,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1,910,736
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1,910,736
<EPS-BASIC>                                            0.49
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          0.49



</TABLE>