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 to Continue Trial Date/

CZINEGE/ CR06-109MJP — 1 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

THE HONORABLE MARSHA J. PECHMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

) CASE NO.CR06-109P

 Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER OF CONTINUANCE

)

)

STEVE ATILLA CZINEGE, )

)

)

 Defendant. ) )

The Court having reviewed the stipulated motion by the United States and

defendant STEVE ATILLA CZINEGE to continue the trial date, and having reviewed the

records and files herein, makes the following findings and enters the following order:

The Court finds that pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A) and §3161(h)(8)(B)(i),

(ii) and (iv), the ends of justice served by continuing the trial date from October 30, 2006

to December 11, 2006, outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a

speedy trial. This matter is complex due to the uncertain legal posture of the case and it

is therefore unreasonable to expect the parties to adequately prepare for trial before

December 11, 2006. Additionally, failure to grant a continuance to December 11, 2006

would deny the defendant the time necessary for effective preparation, taking into

account the exercise of due diligence, and would result in a miscarriage of justice.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that trial in this matter is continued from 

October 30, 2006 to December 11, 2006 at 9:00 a.m.

Case 2:06-cr-00109-JLR Document 58 Filed 10/20/06 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 to Continue Trial Date/

CZINEGE/ CR06-109MJP — 2 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for purposes of computing the time limitations 

imposed by the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161-3164, the period of delay from 

October 30, 2006, up to and including December 11, 2006, is excludable time pursuant to 

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). Defendant shall file a waiver of his Speedy Trial rights as

outlined in the Stipulated Motion no later than October 27, 2006.

DATED this 20th day of October, 2006.

/S/Marsha J. Pechman 

MARSHA J. PECHMAN

United States District Judge

Presented by:

 /s Jill Otake 

JILL OTAKE

Assistant United States Attorney

WA Bar # 28298

United States Attorney’s Office

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, WA 98101

Telephone: (206) 553-4254

Fax: (206) 553-0755

E-mail: jill.otake@usdoj.gov

Case 2:06-cr-00109-JLR Document 58 Filed 10/20/06 Page 2 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 ON BASTROM’S

MOTION TO STRIKE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

STEVEN INGERSOLL, a Washington

resident, LYNN BASTROM, a Washington

resident, and on behalf of themselves and all

others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

ROYAL & SUNALLIANCE USA, a foreign

corporation, 

Defendant.

Case No. CV05-1774RSL

ORDER ON BASTROM’S 

MOTION TO STRIKE

This matter comes before the Court on defendant “Bastrom’s Motion to Strike His

‘Request to Participate in Collective Action’” (Dkt. # 65). Bastrom is already a named plaintiff

in this action and submitted a “Request to Participate in Collective Action” in error. Absent

opposition from defendants, the Court hereby GRANTS Bastrom’s motion (Dkt. # 65) and

STRIKES Bastrom’s unnecessary request to participate (Dkt. # 63).

DATED this 16th day of May, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01774-MAT Document 74 Filed 05/16/06 Page 1 of 1
Order entered September 7, 2018

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 17

- 01115

- CV

PATRICK DAUGHERTY, Appellant

V.

HIGHLAND CAPITAL MAN AGEMENT, L.P., Appellee

On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 12

- 04005



### O RDER

Befo re the Court is appellant’s September 6, 2018 unopposed motion for leave to re ply.

We GRANT the motion and ORDER the reply brief be filed no later th an October 1, 2018

.

/s/ DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
TO: Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000(1) 

RECEIVED 

SEP 2 9 2014 

HEARING DOCKET 

ATTENTION: HEARING DOCKET CLERK 

Re: In the Matter of Mary E. Bochiardy 

Docket No. 2011EA170066 

To: His Honor J.E. Sullivan, eta!, 

Please accept my sincere apologies for overlooking to sign my original response for June 24, 

2014. It was an oversight, as I wanted to ensure my prompt response complied within the date 

allowed to respond. 

Enclosed herein please fmd a copy of the updated June 24, 2014 response, Certificate of Service, 

and all signature pages 1,2 and 10,(page 10 now page 12 due to attachments & update) are 

completed. 

Sincerely, 

Mary E~.ochiardy 

Representing Self 

1450 Sunset Point Road 

Clearwater, FL 33755 

TEL: 386-214-0414 

Page 1 of 12 
Certificate of Service 

I hereby certify that on this 23rd day of September, 2014 copies of the foregoing requested 

updates to Request for Supplemental Materials has been served upon the following via USPS 2 

day mail service: 

Dated: Sept 23, 2014 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building- Suite 2Wl000(1) 

Judith L. Vaughan 

Office of the Regional Counsel, Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3255 

FAX: 718-995-5699 

Hon. J.E. Sullivan 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2132 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

1450 Sunset Point Road 

Clearwater, FL 33755 

TEL: 386-214-0414 

ll).arybochiardy@comcast.net 

Page 2 of 12 
The attachment is located at the 

FAA Hearing Docket, 

600 Independence Avenue, SW, Suite 2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 
"" 11m ;r. " ID• < • 

ta 0 " " iii' 

3 $ " " 0 -

a 

" 

3 

0 ~ 7 

0 

0 

0 

c 

3 

< 

!if 

w " 

ru 

" " 

0 

'< 

0. 

m 

, 

,, 

"' " ?" 

I II 1111111111 

P s'nooo 1 oooo 14 

EP14F July 2013 

OD: 12.5 x 9.5 

FIRMLY TO SEAL 

PRJOR/1Y® 

--

-~~~-- 

MIJIL 

IJfiiiTED STIJTES POSTIJLSEIIIIIC:E 

From /Vlar J3d a-v~ Jl.fSoSwnscffl((J 

Cluv~'F'l337S'S 

TO 'FederJ Av,(J

8cO Indepe

\Jttshm:}'fa-n 

A"t"'i1J: HeOirt~"~SDo

~,-.Mbur~n_snr

Label228, January 2008 

ISIT US AT USPS.COM® 

ORDER FREE SUPPLIES ONLINE
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Detail

# Foundation Grants to Rural Areas from 2005 to 2010: Trends and Patterns

Economic Information Bulletin No. (EIB-141) 47 pp, June 2015

by John  Pender

ERS estimates that the value of U.S. foundation grants to benefit rural areas was 6-7 percent of total domestic grants in 2010.

**Keywords:** Rural community development, foundations, philanthropic foundations, foundation grants

**In this publication...**

-  Entire Report 
-  Report summary 
-  Download zip file for eib141 

-  Rural Economy & Population 

-  Food and Nutrition Assistance Research Reports Database 
-  Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes 

**Last updated:** Thursday, June 25, 2015

**For more information contact:**John  Pender
From: Teamlfjf@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:01:36 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,

Jo Fashank

Fayetteville, AR 72703
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit Fund III, L.P.  (the  "Partnership")  for the period ended  September 30,
2003 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the "Report"),  and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  I,  Thomas  J.  Riha,  Chief
Financial  Officer of WNC &  Associates,  Inc.,  general  partner of the General
Partner of the Partnership, hereby certify 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  result  of  operations  of  the
     Partnership.


/s/THOMAS J. RIHA
Thomas J. Riha
Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
November 14, 2003
Exhibit 32.2 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 Amended Annual Report of DNA Systems, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2010 (the "Report"), I, Wilson Cheung, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  /s/Wilson Cheung Wilson Cheung, Principal Financial Officer October 7, 2010
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Federal Reserve Act Amendments (Sections 14 and 16)

              																	United States. Congress. House. Committee on Banking and Currency, 1865-1974					 and 	Eighty-Third Congress, 1953-1955. 						*Federal Reserve Act Amendments (Sections 14 and 16) : Hearings Before the Committee on Banking and Currency, House of Representatives, Eighty-Third Congress, Second Session, on H.R. 8729 and H.R. 9143, May 26 and 27, 1954*,												Washington: 								Government Printing Office, 										May 26-27, 1954,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/368,			accessed on September 23, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
| Skip to Content*Release Date: September 20, 2012*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.225 Life Insurance and Pension Fund Reserves** |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**EXHIBIT 32.1(1)**
**Section 1350 Certification by the Chief Executive Officer**
     I, Timothy A. Richardson, the chief executive officer of Micro LinearCorporation (the “Company”), certify for the purposes of section 1350 ofchapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to the best of myknowledge,
     (i)  the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period endedSeptember 28, 2003 (the “Report”), complies with the requirements of section13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
     (ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.
November 12, 2003    Timothy A. Richardson Chief Executive Officer

(1)  In accordance with Item 601(b)(32)(ii) of Regulation S-K and SEC ReleaseNos. 33-8238 and 34-47986, Final Rule: Management’s Reports on Internal ControlOver Financial Reporting and Certification of Disclosure in Exchange ActPeriodic Reports, the certification furnished in this Exhibit 32.1 is deemed toaccompany this Form 10-Q and will not be deemed “filed” for purpose of Section18 of the Exchange Act. Such certification will not be deemed to beincorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or theExchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specificallyincorporates it by reference.
EXHIBIT
31.2




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I,
Micheal Nugent, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:




1. I have
reviewed this annual report of Nugent Engine Technologies, 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 small business issuer as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4. The
other small business issuer's 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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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 small business issuer'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; and





(c)
Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting; and





5. The
small business issuer's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuer'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 small business issuer's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and





(b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over
financial reporting.





/s/ Micheal Nugent


By
Micheal Nugent


Chief
Financial Officer




March 31,
2010
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

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

BERNARD OTIS HUFF,

Petitioner,

v.

DOUG WADDINGTON, 

Respondent.

Case No. C06-5105RJB

 ORDER DENYING ANY

FURTHER EXTENSION

OF TIME

This habeas corpus petition has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant

to Title 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A) and 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Magistrates' Rules MJR 3 and MJR

4. Petitioner seeks federal habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On June 1st, 2006 petitioner filed a motion for an extension of time. He asked to be given 

until August 2nd, 2006 to file a traverse. (Dkt. # 15). Respondent did not oppose the motion. (Dkt.

# 17). The motion was granted and a traverse was due on or before August 2nd 2006. (Dkt. # 19).

Petitioner did not file a traverse despite the 60 day extension of time. Instead petitioner has

again filed a motion seeking another 60 day extension of time. (Dkt. # 20). He has not shown good

Case 3:06-cv-05105-RJB Document 21 Filed 08/22/06 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

cause for any further extension of time. The impediments he mentions in his affidavit are the normal

incidents of prison life. He has an assigned job and some constraints placed on his time. Further the

number of hours the library is open is limited. These constraints do not warrant any further

extension of time and the motion is DENIED. 

The clerk is directed to send a copy of this order to petitioner and counsel for respondent.

DATED this 22nd day of August, 2006. 

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05105-RJB Document 21 Filed 08/22/06 Page 2 of 2
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 727 

Providing for a moratorium on the consideration of any bill or joint resolution, 

or amendment thereto or conference report thereon, that contains any 

congressional earmark until a bipartisan panel is established to provide 

oversight over the congressional earmarking process and that panel reports its recommendations to the House. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 10, 2007 

Mr. FLAKE (for himself and Mr. MORAN of Kansas) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for a moratorium on the consideration of any 

bill or joint resolution, or amendment thereto or conference report thereon, that contains any congressional 

earmark until a bipartisan panel is established to provide 

oversight over the congressional earmarking process and 

that panel reports its recommendations to the House. 

1 Resolved, That, notwithstanding clause 9 of rule XXI 

2 of the Rules of the House of Representatives, it shall not 

3 be in order to consider any bill or joint resolution, or 

4 amendment thereto or conference report thereon, that con5 tains any congressional earmark (as defined in such rule) 

6 unless and until— 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 727 IH 

1 (1) a bipartisan panel comprised of Members 

2 appointed by the Speaker and the minority leader is 

3 established to make recommendations to the House 

4 on how to better provide oversight of the congres5 sional earmarking process to prevent waste, fraud, 

6 and abuse of taxpayer funds; and 

7 (2) that panel reports its recommendations to 

8 the House. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
* Pursuant to 5 th Cir. 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 Cir. R. 47.5.4.
1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

___________________________

No. 01-60141

___________________________
FIRST TENNESSEE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS TRUSTMARK NATIONAL BANK, Defendant-Appellee.

___________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Mississippi

(3:99-CV-859)

___________________________________________________ August 8, 2001 Before DAVIS, JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * We affirm the judgment of the district court essentially for the reasons stated in its October 6, 2000 Memorandum Opinion and Order

. For reasons given in that opinion, the district court correctly granted Trustmark’s supplemental motion for judgment on the pleadings. Moreover, the district court did not abuse its discretion by de nying First Tennessee’s motion to alter or amend the final judgment. In its first amended complaint, First
Tennessee did not allege a conversion claim that was independent of2

the Mississippi Uniform Commercial Code and the security agreement.
We also conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow First Tennessee to amend its complaint following the district court’s entry of judgment with prejudice. Thus, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.