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

RUSSELL F. STENGER,

Petitioner,

v.

SANDRA CARTER,

Respondent.

Case No. C05-5687RJB

 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION

The Court having reviewed the Report and Recommendation of the Hon. J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge, objections to the Report and Recommendation, if any, and the

remaining record, does hereby find and Order:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) The petition is TRANSFERRED TO THE NINTH CIRCUIT AS A SECOND

OR SUCCESSIVE PETITION. 

(3) The clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Petitioner, and to the Hon. J.

Kelley Arnold AND TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE THIS FILE.

DATED this 21st day of February, 2006.

ARobert J. Bryan

United States District Judge 

Case 3:05-cv-05687-RJB Document 11 Filed 02/21/06 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 10, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69980-69981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22431]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[License No. 09/09-0496]


HCAP Partners V, L.P.; Notice Seeking Exemption Under the Small 
Business Investment Act, Conflicts of Interest

    Notice is hereby given that HCAP Partners V, L.P., 4250 Executive 
Square, Suite 500, La Jolla, CA 92037, a Federal Licensee under the 
Small Business Investment Act of 1958, as amended (``the Act''), in 
connection with the financing of a small concerns, has sought an 
exemption under section 312 of the Act and Section 107.730, Financings 
which Constitute Conflict of Interest of the Small Business 
Administration (``SBA'') Rules and Regulations (13 CFR 107.730). HCAP 
Partners V, L.P. (``HCAP V'') is proposing to provide financing to 
Cubex

[[Page 69981]]

LLC (``Company'') to support the Company's growth.
    The proposed transaction is brought within the purview of Sec.  
107.730 of the Regulations because HCAP Partners III, L.P. (``HCAP 
III''), an Associate of HCAP V by virtue of Common Control as defined 
in Sec.  107.50, holds a 21% of equity interest in the Company. By 
virtue of HCAP III's equity ownership, the Company and HCAP V are also 
Associates. HCAP III expects to receive $18.6 million from the proposed 
transaction.
    Therefore, the proposed transaction requires a regulatory exemption 
pursuant to 13 CFR 107.730. Notice is hereby given that any interested 
person may submit written comments on the transaction within fifteen 
days of the date of this publication to Associate Administrator for 
Investment, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 Third Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20416.

Bailey DeVries,
Associate Administrator, Office of Investment and Innovation, U.S. 
Small Business Administration.
[FR Doc. 2023-22431 Filed 10-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
Case 2:06-cr-00109-JLR Document 119 Filed 03/13/07 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cr-00109-JLR Document 119 Filed 03/13/07 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cr-00109-JLR Document 119 Filed 03/13/07 Page 3 of 3
STERLING


NAIIONAL BANK












                                             500 Seventh Avenue 


                                             New York, NY 10018-45


                                             Phone; 212-5754444


                                             Fax: 212-382-3439


                                             Plamonka@snb.com







                                             Peter La Monica


                                             Vice President


















November 5, 2015

















Mr. Gerry McClinton Capstone Industries, Inc.


350 Jim Moran Boulevard-Suite 120


Deerfield Beach, Florida 33442 Dear Mr. McClinton


Re: Amendment to Factoring Agreement







This letter will modify and  amend  the  Financing  Agreement  between  us dated  August  27,  20 I 0, as follows:







Paragraph 11







For purpose of calculating interest, collections shall be deemed credited to your account


(4) four banking days after receipt thereof by us.







Nothing herein contained shall vary, alter or amend any provisions of said Financing Agreement between us, except as specifically provided herein.







  Gerry McClinton


                           COO
C

ordes

Junction

CastleCreek

BureauofLandManagement

PhoenixDistrictOffice

Phoenix,AZ

October2009

Note:TheBureauofLandManagement(BLM)

conductslanduseplanningonlyintheareasadministered

byBLM.BLMhasnoplanningauthorityunderthe

municipalorcountyplanninglegislationoftheState

ofArizona.

NowarrantyismadebyBLMfortheuseofthismap

forpurposesnotintendedbyBLM,ortotheaccuracy,

reliabilityorcompletenessoftheinformationshown.

SpatialinformationmaynotmeetNationalMapAccuracy

standards.Thisinformationmaybeupdatedwithout

notification.

Note:LandStatuslegendlocatedonMap1

Map15e

Bradshaw-Harquahala

PlanningArea

RouteNetworkforUpper

AguaFriaRiverBasinArea

01234

Miles

BLMWilderness

USFSWilderness

Interstate

MajorRoad

MajorRiver,StreamsorWash

Highway

BradshawHarquahala

PlanningArea

ExistingRouteType

Primary

Secondary

SingleTrack

Tertiary

ManagementUnit
No. 63426.

Suit 4983.

#### Henry Greenberg & Bros. Export & Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States.

C.D. 2032 affirmed June 30, 1959. C.A.D. 709.
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 Quarterly Report of Startech Environmental Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Joseph F. Longo, 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.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request





/s/ Joseph F. Longo
-------------------
Joseph F. Longo
Chief Executive Officer, President
September 19, 2005
Case 2:06-cv-00312-TSZ Document 274 Filed 07/09/08 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cv-00312-TSZ Document 274 Filed 07/09/08 Page 2 of 2
#### Eddy SUCIPTO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-2321, 05-1359.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 20, 2005.

Decided Aug. 5, 2005.

H. Raymond Fasano, Madeo & Fesano, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Michelle Gorden, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C.; Gregory Victor Davis, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Eddy Sucipto, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) adopting and affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention *133Against Torture.* Sucipto contends that he established eligibility for asylum. As the IJ and Board concluded that the asylum application was untimely, we find that consideration of Sudpto’s asylum claim is barred. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1158(a)(8) (2000).

Sucipto also challenges the finding that he failed to qualify for withholding of removal. *See Chen v. INS,*195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir.1999); *INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca,*480 U.S. 421, 430, 107 S.Ct. 1207, 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987). To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” *INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Sucipto fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result.

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.

*PETITION DENIED*

*

 Sucipto also seeks review of the Board's order of March 8, 2005, denying his motion to reopen. He has not, however, presented any claims to the court regarding this order. Likewise, he has not challenged the denial of protection under the Convention Against Torture.
Exhibit 10.08.2

                                AMENDMENT TO THE
                    TRAVELERS GROUP CAPITAL ACCUMULATION PLAN
                       (AS AMENDED THROUGH JULY 23, 1997)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Section 2 (e) of the Travelers Group Capital Accumulation Plan is hereby
amended to add the following sentence at the end of such Section:

                  "The value of any shares allowed to be withheld or tendered
                  for tax withholding may not exceed the amount allowed
                  consistent with fixed plan accounting in accordance with
                  generally accepted accounting principles."
ex10-7pg1

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg2

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg3

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg4

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg5

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg6

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg7

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg8

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg9

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg10

 

 

 



 

 

ex10-7pg11

 

 

 



 

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

FILED

DEC 14 2010 

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK 

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

BRIANA WATERS,

 Defendant - Appellant. 

No. 08-30222 

 

D.C. No. 3:05-cr-05828-FDB-5 

U.S. District Court for Western 

Washington, Tacoma 

MANDATE

The judgment of this Court, entered September 15, 2010, takes effect this 

date. 

This constitutes the formal mandate of this Court issued pursuant to Rule 

41(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. 

FOR THE COURT: 

Molly C. Dwyer 

Clerk of Court 

Synitha Walker 

Deputy Clerk 

Case: 08-30222 12/14/2010 Page: 1 of 1 ID: 7579890 DktEntry: 84 Case 3:05-cr-05828-RBL Document 482 Filed 12/14/10 Page 1 of 1
CL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0454

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

NEIL LYNN NUNES,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to

and including January 2, 2024, within which to prepare, serve, and file the State’s

response brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

November 28 2023

11/28/2023
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-2 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-2 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-2 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00697-RSL Document 83-2 Filed 07/05/2007 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit 13.2

Certification by the Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, Ping

Wei, Chief Financial Officer of China Distance Education Holdings
Limited (the Company), hereby certifies, to the best of her knowledge, that the Companys annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended September 30, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of,
and for the periods presented in the Report.

Date: March 31, 2010



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Ping Wei           
|Name:  |  | Ping Wei               
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
Order Continuing Trial Date - 1 - 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

RAYMOND GEBAUER, 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

) 

No. CR06-122RSL 

ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL 

THIS MATTER COMES before this Court on stipulation of the parties to 

continue the trial in this case. Trial is currently set for March 5, 2007. 

This Court previously found that this case is complex. See docket number 19, at 2. 

Defendant has knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to a speedy trial 

through June 30, 2007. See docket number 13. 

Due to defense counsel’s unavailability due to other federal criminal cases, the 

voluminous discovery and complexity of this case, he has not had the reasonable time 

necessary to effectively prepare for trial. 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(8)(A), (B)(iv), the Court hereby finds that the 

failure to grant the continuance stipulated to by the parties would deny counsel for the 

defense the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the 

exercise of due diligence and the complexity of the case. The Court also finds that the 

ends of justice served by continuing the trial date outweighs the interest of the public and 

Defendant in a speedy trial. 

Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that the trial date in the above-captioned matter 

shall be May 29, 2007. 

Case 2:06-cr-00122-JLR Document 38 Filed 01/26/07 Page 1 of 2
Order Continuing Trial Date - 2 - 

 

It is further ORDERED that the period of delay from March 5, 2007 to May 29, 

2007, is excludable, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(8)(A),(B)(ii), (B)(iii), and (B)(iv), 

for the purpose of computing the time limitations imposed by the Speedy Trial Act, 18 

U.S.C. §§ 3161-3174. 

 It is further ORDERED that all pretrial motions shall be filed by April 13, 2007. 

Dated this 26th day of January, 2007. 

A

Robert S. Lasnik 

United States District Judge 

 

Presented by: 

 

_/s/ Alan S. Richey 

Alan Stuart Richey 

Counsel for Raymond Gebauer 

WSBA #30578 

P.O. Box 1505 

Port Hadlock, Washington 98339 

Telephone: (360) 437-4005 

Email: asratty@gmail.com 

 

 

Case 2:06-cr-00122-JLR Document 38 Filed 01/26/07 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 FOR DISMISSAL

PATHANIA/CR06-93MJP - 1

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

The Honorable Robert S. Lasnik

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )) NO. CR06-82RSL Plaintiff, ) v. )) ORDER TO DISMISS RAMAN PATHANIA, ) INDICTMENT WITHOUT ) PREJUDICE Defendant ) ______________________________)

This matter having come on before the undersigned court on the Government’s

Motion to Dismiss without Prejudice, pursuant to F.R.Cr.P. 48, the Court having

considered the Motion and files and records, now therefore,

DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the above-entitled Indictment as the

conduct charged is subsumed into United States v. Kavel Multani, et al., CR06-38RSM. 

DATED the 17th day of May, 2006. 

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cr-00082-RSL Document 14 Filed 05/17/06 Page 1 of 1
**EXHIBIT 32
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. [] 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

             In connection with the Annual Report of American Bancorp of New Jersey, Inc. (the"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission (the "Report"), we, Joseph Kliminski, Chief Executive Officer, and Eric B.Heyer, Senior Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, 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 requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

             (2)             The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods presented in the financial statementes included in the Report.
/s/ Joseph KliminskiJoseph KliminskiChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)/s/ Eric B. HeyerEric B. HeyerSenior Vice President, Treasurer andChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) Date: December 14, 2006Date: December 14, 2006**
Case 2:06-cv-00362-JLR Document 18 Filed 07/14/06 Page 1 of 1
No. 68519.

protests 62/11775, etc. (New York).

#### Roth Flower Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise, identified on the invoices as item No. 1401, is not in chief value of yarns, threads, or filaments and is in chief value of other material, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
AAM-13-165-E 

February 04, 2013 

 Exemption No. 10707 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2013-0032 

Mr. Lloyd Hetrick 

HR Manager/Drug Alcohol Program Manager 

Hetrick Air Services 

1930 Airport Road 

Lawrence, KS 66044 

Dear Mr. Hetrick: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your request for exemption. It transmits our 

decision, explains its basis, and gives you the conditions and limitations of the exemption, 

including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated January 8, 2013, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 

behalf of Hetrick Air Services for an exemption from part 120 of Title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption, if granted, would allow Hetrick Air Services, which 

is operating under separate parts of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees 

under one drug and alcohol testing program. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Hetrick Air Services. 

The FAA has issued a grant of exemption in circumstances similar in all material respects to 

those presented in your petition. In Grant of Exemption No. 9703 (copy enclosed), the FAA 

found that Solid Edge’s § 91.147 air tour operations were closely connected to its part 135 

operations. The FAA also found that combining the petitioner’s two testing programs into 

one would be in the public interest and would maintain an equivalent level of safety to that 

provided by the current regulations. Thus, the FAA concluded it was unnecessary to burden 

the petitioner by requiring it to conduct two separate testing programs. 
2 

Having reviewed your reasons for requesting an exemption, I find that— 

 they are similar in all material respects to relief previously requested in the enclosed Grant 

of Exemption No. 9703; 

 the reasons stated by the FAA for granting the enclosed Grant of Exemption No. 9703 

also apply to the situation you present; and 

 a grant of exemption is in the public interest. 

Our Decision 

Under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator 

has delegated to me, I hereby grant Hetrick Air Services an exemption from 14 CFR part 120 

to the extent necessary to allow Hetrick Air Services, which is operating under separate parts 

of the regulations, to cover its safety-sensitive employees under one testing program, subject 

to the conditions and limitations described below. 

Conditions and Limitations 

1. Employees of Hetrick Air Services are subject to the drug and alcohol regulations at 

all times while conducting operations under part 135 or part 91. 

 2. The drug and alcohol testing program must be implemented under the auspices of the 

Hetrick Air Services part 135 operation, not under part 91. 

This exemption terminates on February 28, 2015, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

James R. Fraser, M.D. 

Deputy Federal Air Surgeon 

Enclosure
Wayne E. Jackson, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

United States of America, 

Defendant. 

--

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) Civil Action No. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

FILED 

JAN f 6 2009 

NANcy MAYER WHITT/NGTO 

U.S. DISTRICT cour#' ClERK 

Og U1D1 

This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff s pro se complaint and application 

to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application and will dismiss the 

complaint as it is required to do ifit determines that a prisoner action is frivolous. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915A(b). 

Plaintiff, a prisoner at the United States Penitentiary Lee in Jonesville, Virginia, sues the 

United States under the Trading with the Enemy Act, 50 App. U.S.C. § 1 et seq., for "the return 

of any and all negotiable instruments forwarded to agents of the United States of America and 

transferred to the Alien Property Custodian and/or deposited in the Treasury of the United States 

of America." CompI. at 5. Plaintiff also seeks to discharge alleged debts "on record with the 

United States District Court for the District of Maryland (Northern Division)" that he claims 

were satisfied by "Third Party Interpleader, Wayne Earl Jackson-EI[,] [who] has submitted 

several payments to 'discharge'" the debt. Id. Plaintiff has stated no cognizable claim under the 

Trading with the Enemy Act, which governs, inter alia, claims to property seized "from [a 

foreign] enemy or ally of [said] enemy," 50 App. U.S.C. § 9(a), and the claim arising from 

proceedings in the District of Maryland should be pursued in that court. 
Complaints that describe fantastic or delusional scenarios are subject to dismissal under 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319,328 (1989); Best v. Kelly, 39 

F.3d 328,330-31 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Moreover, a complaint may be dismissed as frivolous when 

it lacks "an arguable basis in law and fact," Brandon v. District of Columbia Bd. of Parole, 734 

F.2d 56, 59 (D.C. Cir.1984), or is based on "fanciful factual allegation[s]." Neitzke, 490 U.S. at 

325. This complaint qualifies for such treatment and, thus, is dismissed. A separate Order of 

accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. 

Date: December ~, 2008 

2
Before the First Division,

August 6, 1957

No. 61116.

protest 308091-K (New York).

#### M. Pressner & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of dime savings banks in chief value of tin or tin plate the same in all material respects as those the subject of *M. Pressner & Co.*v. *United States*(36 Cust. Ct. 262, C. D. 1784), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.