alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Before the First Division,

January 20, 1955

No. 58704.

protests 200902-K, 200928-K, and 222762-K (Los Angeles).

#### New York Merchandise, Inc. *v.*United States,

*266Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of glass bead Christmas tree ornaments similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Walco Bead Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 62, C. D. 1445), the claim of the plaintiff 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

27

28

ORDER - 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DEBT SOLUTIONS, INC., et al.

Defendants.

CASE NO. C06-298JLR

ORDER

This matter comes before the court on the motion of the Federal Trade

Commission (“FTC”) to strike Defendants’ affirmative defenses under Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12(f) (Dkt. # 40). Despite repeated extensions, Defendants have not opposed the

motion. 

Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f), the court may strike “any insufficient defense” from a

pleading. A Rule 12(f) motion is, however, a rarity. The Ninth Circuit has never

announced a standard for determining whether a defense is insufficient. District courts

within the Ninth Circuit have uniformly stated that such motions are disfavored. See,

e.g., Cal. Dep’t of Toxic Substances Control v. Alco Pac., Inc., 217 F. Supp. 2d 1028,

(C.D. Cal. 2002) (“Motions to strike are generally regarded with disfavor because of the

limited importance of pleading in federal practice, and because they are often used as a

delaying tactic.”). In order to strike Defendants’ allegedly “insufficient” affirmative

Case 2:06-cv-00298-JLR Document 46 Filed 08/07/06 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

27

28

ORDER - 2 

defenses, the FTC must show that “there are no questions of fact, that any questions of

law are clear and not in dispute, and that under no set of circumstances could the defense

succeed.” Id. at 1032 (citations omitted).

Although motions to strike are disfavored, the FTC has met its burden to show that

each of Defendants’ affirmative defenses are “insufficient” as a matter of law. The court

finds no merit in Defendants’ affirmative defense that the court lacks subject matter

jurisdiction over the claims of the State of Washington. As to the equitable defenses of

estoppel, waiver, unclean hands, and laches, the FTC correctly notes that equitable

defenses are unavailable to a party seeking to avoid a governmental entity’s exercise of

statutory power. Finally, the court is satisfied that the defense of accord and satisfaction

has no applicability to this action as a matter of law.

For these reasons, the court GRANTS the FTC’s motion to strike (Dkt. # 40).

Dated this 7th day of August, 2006.

A 

JAMES L. ROBART

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00298-JLR Document 46 Filed 08/07/06 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 68 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 68

       To adjourn sine die the 1st session of the 105th Congress

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 13, 1997

   Mr. Lott submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
       To adjourn sine die the 1st session of the 105th Congress

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Thursday, 
November 13, 1997, or Friday, November 14, 1997, on a motion offered 
pursuant to this concurrent resolution by the Majority Leader or his 
designee, it stand adjourned sine die, or until noon on the second day 
after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this 
concurrent resolution, and that when the Senate adjourns on Thursday, 
November 13, 1997, or Friday, November 14, 1997, on a motion offered 
pursuant to this concurrent resolution by the Majority Leader or his 
designee, it stand adjourned sine die, or until noon on the second day 
after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this 
concurrent resolution.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, 
in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
    Sec. 3. The Congress declares that clause 5 of rule III of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives and the order of the Senate of 
January 7, 1997, authorize for the duration of the One Hundred Fifth 
Congress the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Secretary of 
the Senate, respectively: to receive messages from the President during 
periods when the House and Senate are not in session and thereby 
preserve until adjournment sine die of the final regular session of the 
One Hundred Fifth Congress the constitutional prerogative of the House 
and Senate to reconsider vetoed measures in light of the objections of 
the President, since the availability of the Clerk and the Secretary 
during any earlier adjournment of either House during the current 
Congress does not prevent the return by the President of any bill 
presented to him for approval.
    Sec. 4. The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall inform the 
President of the United States of the adoption of this concurrent 
resolution.
                                 <all>
```
No. 67605.

#### J. Gerber & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/29979 (New York).

*269Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of electrically operated vacuum brushes similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Bruce Duncan Company, a/c Sims-Worms v. United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 85, C.D. 2202), the claim of the plaintiff 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

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

THOMAS PAUL WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

HENRY RICHARDS et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5289RBL

ORDER ADOPTING

REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION

 The Court, having reviewed, the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge J. Kelley

Arnold, objections to the Report and Recommendation, if any, and the remaining record, does hereby

find and ORDER:

(1) (A) This is not a class action lawsuit under FRCP 23, although plaintiff

refers to a “class” in the complaint. (Dkt. # 6, page 30).

(B) Plaintiff is, apparently a member of the class formed in

Turay v. Seling, C91-664RSM, and is, as a class

member, represented by counsel in that case.

(C) The issues plaintiff attempts to raise in his Complaint

substantially overlap with issues raised in the Turay

case. Insofar as these issues do overlap, they should be

raised in Turay. The court is aware of the unpublished

9th opinion in Scott v. Seling, CV 03-5398RBL. The

court sees no reason plaintiff cannot move to lift the

stay in Turay to bring the conditions of confinement

complained of to that courts attention. The conditions

Case 3:05-cv-05289-RBL Document 8 Filed 08/09/05 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

of confinement and the treatment environment were the

focus of injunctive relief that is being monitored by the

Turay court. (D) The Turay case is still open as is reflected in that file.

(E) Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. # 6) does not comply with

FRCP 8(a), which requires “a short plain statement of

the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,”

or FRCP 8(e), which requires that “each averment of a

pleading shall be simple, concise, and direct.” While

“no technical forms of pleadings...are required,” and

while “all pleadings should be construed to do

substantial justice ,” FRCP 8(e), it is extremely difficult

to figure out just what, if anything, plaintiff is

complaining about that is not within the scope of Turay

and is covered within the scope of federal jurisdiction. 

This is a sufficient basis, standing alone, to call for the

dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint without prejudice.

(F) Although this suit seeks money damages, no damage request could be

considered until such time as the plaintiff prevailed under Turay.

(2) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation.

(3) The complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

(4) The clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to plaintiff, counsel for any

defendants who have appeared, and to the Hon. J. Kelley Arnold.

DATED this 9th day of August, 2005.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05289-RBL Document 8 Filed 08/09/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 63895.

protest 58/7611 (St. Louis).

#### New York Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of carrizo baskets the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Chester K. Stoner*v. *United States*(42 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2083), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 62270.

#### World Wide Services, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 320161-K (B) (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with rule 5 (b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
```

[Federal Register: August 5, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 150)]
[Notices]               
[Page 47338]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05au10-106]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7078]

 
Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``The Nepalese Legacy in Tibetan Painting''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000, I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``The Nepalese Legacy in Tibetan Painting,'' 
imported from abroad for temporary exhibition within the United States, 
are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan 
agreements with the foreign owners or custodians. I also determine that 
the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Rubin Museum of 
Art, New York, NY, from on or about September 3, 2010, until on or 
about May 23, 2011, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues 
yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have ordered that 
Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the Federal 
Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Julie Simpson, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6467). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: July 30, 2010.
Ann Stock,
Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Bureau of 
Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010-19321 Filed 8-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 816 

Congratulating the Colorado Rockies on winning the National League 

Championship and playing in the 2007 World Series. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 9, 2007 

Mr. UDALL of Colorado (for himself, Ms. DEGETTE, Mr. LAMBORN, Mrs. 

MUSGRAVE, Mr. PERLMUTTER, Mr. SALAZAR, and Mr. TANCREDO) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Congratulating the Colorado Rockies on winning the National 

League Championship and playing in the 2007 World Series. 

Whereas on October 15, 2007, the Colorado Rockies completed a remarkable 21 out of 22 game-winning streak, 

with a 4-game sweep of the Arizona Diamondbacks, and 

won the 2007 National League Championship series; 

Whereas the Colorado Rockies then played in the franchise’s 

first World Series against the Boston Red Sox; 

Whereas the Colorado Rockies demonstrated remarkable 

team unity, as well as individual initiative and personal 

determination, and serve as a prime example of good 

sportsmanship; 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 816 IH 

Whereas the Colorado Rockies fans demonstrated their passion for their team, their love of baseball, and their character as some of the world’s greatest baseball enthusiasts; 

and 

Whereas the city of Denver and the State of Colorado exhibited their ability to host a fantastic Major League Baseball post-season: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) congratulates— 

3 (A) the Colorado Rockies on winning the 

4 2007 National League Championship and ad5 vancing to the 2007 World Series; 

6 (B) the players, manager, coaches, support 

7 staff, ownership, and executives whose commit8 ment to the game made this all possible; and 

9 (C) the Boston Red Sox for their extraor10 dinary success in winning the 2007 World Se11 ries; and 

12 (2) directs the Enrolling Clerk of the House of 

13 Repesentatives to transmit an enrolled copy of this 

14 resolution to— 

15 (A) the 2007 Colorado Rockies and Boston 

16 Red Sox baseball teams; 

17 (B) Colorado Rockies manager Clint Hur18 dle; and 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 816 IH 

1 (C) Colorado Baseball Partnership’s chief 

2 executive officer and chairman Charlie Monfort. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
No. P67/160.

#### S. Hiller Co. *v.*United States,

protest 66/5762 (New York).

Landis, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of telephone locks of plate or disc tumbler construction; that locks of plate or disc tumbler construction were held not to fall within the tariff designation locks of pin tumbler or cylinder construction in *Shriro Trading Corp. v. United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 422, C.D. 2669); that the instant locks are, in fact, of plate or disc tumbler construction, and are, in fact, not padlocks, cabinet, or drawer locks and are in chief value of base metal, the claim of the plaintiff 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 GRANTING EXTENSION OF

TIME TO DISCLOSE WITNESS LIST 

AND CONTACT INFORMATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARD ALLEN FABEL, 

RODNEY ROLLNESS, 

JOSHUA BINDER, and 

RICKY JENKS, and

PAUL FOSTER.

Defendants.

Case No. CR06-041L

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF

TIME TO DISCLOSE WITNESS LIST

AND CONTACT INFORMATION

This matter comes before the Court on the “Government’s Emergency Motion For

Reconsideration of Court’s Ordering of Witness List & Contact Information By December 1 Or

Motion for Extension of Time Within Which To Comply” (Dkt. #309). The Government seeks

an additional week to comply with the Court’s November 29, 2006 Order (Dkt. #305) requiring

it to disclose its witness list and accompanying contact information to defendants. Defendants

Rollness, Binder and Jenks do not object to the Government’s request assuming that their soon

to be filed requests for continuance will be considered by the Court. In anticipation of the

Court’s consideration of the motions for a continuance in the coming days, the Court hereby

GRANTS the Government’s motion to extend the deadline to provide defendants with a witness

Case 2:06-cr-00041-RSL Document 318 Filed 12/01/06 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 GRANTING EXTENSION OF

TIME TO DISCLOSE WITNESS LIST 

AND CONTACT INFORMATION

-2-

list and contact information (Dkt. #309). As such, the Government shall turn over its witness list

and contact information to defendants no later than December 8, 2006.

DATED this 1st day of December, 2006

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cr-00041-RSL Document 318 Filed 12/01/06 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          10,715
<SECURITIES>                                       611
<RECEIVABLES>                                   20,503
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      5,615
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,388
<PP&E>                                          15,829
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (7,018)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  67,585
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,383
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        42,529
<OTHER-SE>                                       (327)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    67,585
<SALES>                                         57,484
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                60,741
<CGS>                                           40,148
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,488
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                25,581
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   8
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,775)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,796)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,979)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     311
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,668)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.28)
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 31.1****Rule 13a-14(a) Certification by the Chief Executive Officer**I, Timothy A. Richardson, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Micro Linear Corporation;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations 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 andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and c) Disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in thecase of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.         Date: August 17, 2005           By: /s/ Timothy A. Richardson             Timothy A. Richardson      Chief Executive Officer      (Principal Executive Officer)