alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 

ELIAS CASTANEDA-GOMEZ,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 06-199M

DETENTION ORDER 

Offenses charged: 

Count 1: Conspiracy to Commit Bank Fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344 and 2.

Date of Detention Hearing: May 25, 2006.

The Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and

based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention hereafter set forth, finds:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) Defendant is a citizen of Mexico, and has no ties to this community or to the

Western District of Washington.

(2) Defendant has stipulated to detention because of his immigration issues, but

reserves the right to contest his continued detention if there is a change in circumstances.

(3) There appear to be no conditions or combination of conditions other than

detention that will reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance at future Court hearings.

Case 2:06-mj-00199-JPD Document 18 Filed 05/25/06 Page 1 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the custody of the

Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility separate, to the extent

practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

pending appeal;

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with

counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which defendant

is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose

of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and

(4) The Clerk shall direct copies of this Order to counsel for the United States, to

counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United States

Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 26th day of May, 2006.AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-mj-00199-JPD Document 18 Filed 05/25/06 Page 2 of 2
No. P67/203.

#### St. Mary’s Church *v.*United States,

protest 62/1095(B) (Los Angeles).

Oliver J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of faceted stained glass window panels which are works of art, imported for and installed in a church, similar in all material respects to the stained glass windows the subject of *Mission of San Gabriel*and *W. J. Byrnes & Co.*v. *United States*(44 Cust. Ct. 157, C.D. 2171); *V. Rev. Kilian*McGowan, *C. P. Rector*v. *United States*(56 Cust. Ct. 450, C.D. 2673) ; and *Castelazo & Associates et al.*v. *United States*(57 Cust. Ct. 67, C.D. 2728), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 152 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 152

 To direct the Senate Legal Counsel to appear as amicus curiae in the 
 name of the Senate in City of New York, et al. v. William Clinton, et 
                        al., and related cases.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 9, 1997

    Mr. Lott (for himself and Mr. Daschle) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 To direct the Senate Legal Counsel to appear as amicus curiae in the 
 name of the Senate in City of New York, et al. v. William Clinton, et 
                        al., and related cases.

Whereas, in the cases of City of New York, et al. v. William Clinton, et al., 
        Civ. No. 97-2393, National Treasury Employees Union, et al., v. United 
        States, et al., Civ. No. 97-2399, and Snake River Potato Growers, Inc., 
        et al., v. Robert Rubin, Civ. No. 97-2463, all pending in the United 
        States District Court for the District of Columbia, the 
        constitutionality of the Line Item Veto Act, Public Law No. 104-130, 110 
        Stat. 1200 (1996), has been placed in issue; and
Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(c), 706(a), and 713(a) of the Ethics in 
        Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. 288b(c), 288e(a), and 2881(a), the 
        Senate may direct its counsel to appear as amicus curiae in the name of 
        the Senate in any legal action in which the powers and responsibilities 
        of Congress under the Constitution are placed in issue: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved, That the Senate Legal Counsel is directed to appear as amicus 
curiae on behalf of the Senate in the cases of City of New York, et al. v. 
William Clinton, et al.; National Treasury Employees Union, et al., v. United 
States, et al.; and Snake River Potato Growers, Inc., et al., v. Robert Rubin, 
to defend the constitutionality of the Line Item Veto Act.
    Sec. 2. That while the Senate is adjourned the Senate Legal Counsel is 
authorized to appear as amicus curiae on behalf of the Senate in other cases in 
which the constitutionality of the Line Item Veto Act is placed in issue: 
Provided, That the Joint Leadership Group authorizes the Senate Legal Counsel to 
appear as amicus curiae on behalf of the Senate in such other cases.
                                 <all>
```
# Official Journal C 138A/7 Ju

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 138A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 487 June 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 138A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 487 June 2005

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Notices |
| | Commission |
| 2005/C 138A/1 | Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/1801 | 1 |
| 2005/C 138A/2 | Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/10002 | 2 |
| 2005/C 138A/3 | Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/1800 | 3 |
| 2005/C 138A/4 | Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/1802 | 4 |
| 2005/C 138A/5 | Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/10000 | 5 |

Notice No

Contents

page

III   Notices

Commission

2005/C 138A/1

Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/1801

1

2005/C 138A/2

Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/10002

2

2005/C 138A/3

Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/1800

3

2005/C 138A/4

Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/1802

4

2005/C 138A/5

Publication of a vacancy for Director (Grade A*14) (Article 29(2) of the Staff Regulations) COM/2005/10000

5

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 237

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the situation in Indonesia

and East Timor.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 22, 1998

Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. REED, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. MOYNIHAN, Mr.

KOHL, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. HARKIN, and Mr. WELLSTONE) submitted the

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the situation

in Indonesia and East Timor.

Whereas recent political turmoil and economic failure in Indonesia have endangered the people of that country and

fomented instability in the region;

Whereas President Suharto has properly responded to this

crisis by resigning, after 32 years in office, the presidency of Indonesia in accordance with Indonesia’s constitutional processes;

Whereas Indonesia is now embarking on a new era that is

ripe for political and economic reform;
2

•SRES 237 IS

Whereas in 1975 Indonesia invaded, and since that time has

illegally occupied, East Timor claiming the lives of approximately 200,000 East Timorese;

Whereas Indonesia has systematically committed human

rights abuses against the people of East Timor through

arbitrary arrests, torture, disappearances, extra-judicial

executions, and general political repression;

Whereas 8 United Nations General Assembly and 2 United

Nations Security Council resolutions have reaffirmed the

right of the people of East Timor to self-determination;

Whereas Bishop Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo and Jose

Ramos-Horta, who were awarded the 1996 Nobel Peace

Prize for their courageous contribution to the East

Timorese struggle, have called for a United Nations-sponsored referendum on self-determination of the East

Timorese;

Whereas President Clinton in a letter dated December 27,

1996, expressed interest in the idea of a United Nationssponsored referendum on self-determination in East

Timor;

Whereas the United States cosponsored a 1997 United Nations Human Rights Commission Resolution calling for

Indonesia to comply with the directives of existing United

Nations resolutions regarding East Timor; and

Whereas present circumstances provide a unique opportunity

for a resolution of the East Timor question: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that the

2 President should—
3

•SRES 237 IS

1 (1) encourage the new political leadership in In2 donesia to institute genuine democratic and eco3 nomic reforms, including the establishment of an

4 independent judiciary, civilian control of the mili5 tary, and the release of political prisoners;

6 (2) encourage the new political leadership in In7 donesia to promote and protect the human rights

8 and fundamental freedoms of all the people of Indo9 nesia and East Timor; and

10 (3) work actively, through the United Nations

11 and with United States allies, to carry out the direc12 tives of existing United Nations resolutions on East

13 Timor and to support an internationally supervised

14 referendum on self-determination.

15 SEC. 2. The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit

16 a copy of this resolution to the President.

Æ
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 FOR FURTHER BRIEFING

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

_______________________________________)

JAMES ELLIOT, )

) No. C06-0474RSL

Plaintiff, ) 

v. )

) ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

MONROE CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX, ) BRIEFING 

)

Defendant. )

_______________________________________)

This matter comes before the Court on “Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment” in

the above-captioned matter. Dkt. # 16. Defendant argues that the Court should grant summary

judgment based upon plaintiff’s alleged failure to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to

pursuing litigation. Plaintiff opposes the motion arguing that his physical and mental disabilities

prevent him from meeting the exhaustion requirement. Having reviewed the memoranda,

declarations, and exhibits submitted by the parties, and having reviewed the relevant statutes and

case law, the Court finds that further briefing on the following topics would be helpful to the full

and accurate adjudication of this matter:

(1) Plaintiff claims that defendant discriminated against him and failed to provide

reasonable accommodation by placing plaintiff in the general population of inmates. Did

defendant’s grievance program constitute an “available” remedy through which plaintiff could

contest his placement in the general population? See Booth v. Churner, 532 U.S. 731, 736

(2001), Brown v. Valoff, 422 F.3d 926, 935 n.10 (9th Cir. 2004).

Case 2:06-cv-00474-RSL Document 30 Filed 12/13/06 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 FOR FURTHER BRIEFING -2-

(2) Plaintiff claims that defendant discriminated against him and failed to provide

reasonable accommodation by imposing administrative segregation upon plaintiff. Did

defendant’s grievance program constitute an “available” remedy through which plaintiff could

contest his segregation? Id.

Defendant may respond to the above questions in a supplemental memorandum of no

more than ten pages, filed and served no later than Friday, January 5, 2007. Plaintiff may file

and serve a reply memorandum of no more than ten pages by Friday, January 19, 2007. The

Clerk of Court is directed to renote defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. # 16) on the

Court’s calendar for Friday, January 19, 2007. 

DATED this 13th day of December, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00474-RSL Document 30 Filed 12/13/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 58299.

protests 176706-K, etc. (Ogdensburg).

#### E. Dillingham, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that the subject of *United States*v. *Geo. Wm. Bueff, Inc.*(41 C. C. P. A. 95, C. A. D. 535), the claim of the^plaintiffs was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

_______________________________________)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

) No. CR05-433RSL

Plaintiff, ) 

v. )

) ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

KENNETH GOUIN, ) MOTION FOR BILL OF

) PARTICULARS

Defendant. )

_______________________________________)

I. INTRODUCTION

This matter comes before the Court on defendant’s “Motion for Bill of Particulars” (Dkt.

#49). In his motion, defendant seeks an order compelling the government to file a bill of

particulars setting forth the facts on which the government intends to rely in establishing that the

images at issue in this case were shipped or transported in interstate commerce. See Motion at

1. For the reasons set forth below, the Court denies defendant’s motion.

II. DISCUSSION

Defendant is charged in a single-count indictment with a violation of 18 U.S.C. §§

2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2), Possession of Visual Images of Minors Engaged in Sexually Explicit

Conduct. See Dkt. #12 (Indictment). Under Fed. R. Crim. P. 7(f), “[t]he court may direct the

government to file a bill of particulars.” A bill of particulars may be necessary “[t]o inform the

defendant of the nature of the charge against him with sufficient precision to enable him to

Case 2:05-cr-00433-RSL Document 53 Filed 03/05/08 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 DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS -2-

prepare for trial, to avoid or minimize the danger of surprise at the time of trial, and to enable

him to plead his acquittal or conviction in bar of another prosecution for the same offense when

the indictment itself is too vague, and indefinite for such purposes.” United States v. Ayers, 924

F.2d 1468, 1483 (9th Cir. 1991) (internal citation and quotation omitted). The purposes served

by a bill of particulars are accomplished if the indictment provides sufficient detail of the

charges and if the defendant is provided full discovery. United States v. Mitchell, 744 F.2d 701,

705 (9th Cir. 1984). 

Defendant’s motion is directed at the element of the charged offense concerning the

government’s burden to prove that the alleged images of child pornography in defendant’s

residence had been shipped or transported in interstate commerce. See Motion at 2-3. In this

case, however, the government has provided defendant with full discovery, including

information as to the out-of-state origin of the images at issue in the case, and the indictment

provides sufficient detail of the charges. See Dkt. #12 (Indictment); Dkt. #52 (Response).

III. CONCLUSION

For all of the foregoing reasons, defendant’s “Motion for Bill of Particulars” (Dkt. #49) is

DENIED.

DATED this 5th day of March, 2008.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge 

Case 2:05-cr-00433-RSL Document 53 Filed 03/05/08 Page 2 of 2
II

Calendar No. 20

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 18

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating

to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 27, 1997

Mr. HOLLINGS (for himself, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr. BRYAN, Mr.

BIDEN, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. REED of Rhode Island, Mr. CONRAD, Mr.

DORGAN, and Mr. REID) introduced the following joint resolution; which

was read twice and ordered placed on the calendar

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two3 thirds of each House concurring therein), That the follow4 ing article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitu5 tion of the United States, to be valid only if ratified by
2

SJ 18 PCS

1 the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States with2 in 7 years after the date of final passage of this joint reso3 lution:

4 ‘‘ARTICLE—

5 ‘‘SECTION 1. Congress shall have power to set reason6 able limits on the amount of contributions that may be

7 accepted by, and the amount of expenditures that may be

8 made by, in support of, or in opposition to, a candidate

9 for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal

10 office.

11 ‘‘SECTION 2. A State shall have power to set reason12 able limits on the amount of contributions that may be

13 accepted by, and the amount of expenditures that may be

14 made by, in support of, or in opposition to, a candidate

15 for nomination for election to, or for election to, State or

16 local office.

17 ‘‘SECTION 3. Congress shall have power to implement

18 and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.’’.

Calendar No. 20

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 18

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the

penditures intended to affect elections.United States relating to contributions and exFEBRUARY 27, 1997

Read twice and ordered placed on the calendar
Vacate and Dismiss and Opinion Filed December 7, 2015 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-01372-CV 

CHRISTOPHER PATTERSON AND STEVENS TRANSPORT, INC., Appellants 

V. 

GLENDY W. TOLBERT, JR., Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-14-01126-D 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Bridges, Lang-Miers, and Schenck 

Opinion by Justice Bridges 

Before the Court is the parties’ agreed motion to vacate judgment and dismiss case. The 

parties have informed the Court that they have settled their differences. Accordingly, we grant 

the parties’ motion, vacate the trial court’s August 17, 2015 judgment without regard to the 

merits, and dismiss this case with prejudice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(2). 

151372F.P05 

 

/David L .Bridges/ 

DAVID L. BRIDGES 

JUSTICE 
 –2– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

CHRISTOPHER PATTERSON AND 

STEVENS TRANSPORT, INC., Appellants 

No. 05-15-01372-CV V. 

GLENDY W. TOLBERT, JR., Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 4, Dallas County, Texas. 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-14-01126-D. 

Opinion delivered by Justice Bridges. 

Justices Lang-Miers and Schenck 

participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s August 17, 2015 

judgment is VACATED without regard to the merits and this case is DISMISSED with 

prejudice. 

 It is ORDERED that the parties bear their own costs of this appeal. 

Judgment entered December 7, 2015.
Before the Second Division,

October 2, 1967

No. P67/324.

No. P67/325.

No. P67/326.

No. P67/327.

#### John A. Steer Company *v.*United States, protests 62/5917, etc. (Philadelphia). John A. Steer Company *v.*United States, protests 62/12012, etc. (Philadelphia). John A. Steer Company *v.*United States, protests 62/15147, etc. (Philadelphia). John A. Steer Company *v.*United States, protests 64/14139 and 64/14140 (Philadelphia).

Rao, C. J.

In- accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of coordinato-graphs or parts, dedicated for use therewith, in chief value of metal, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *John A. Steer Company*v. *United States*(53 CCPA 67, C.A.D. 879), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 31.4

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) UNDER

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Thomas W. Osgood, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K/A of Xenith Bankshares, Inc.; and
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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;
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|               |  |  |  |                                                                                              
|-------------- |  |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|April 29, 2016 |  |  |  | /s/ Thomas W. Osgood                                                                         
|               |  |  |  | Thomas W. Osgood                                                                             
|               |  |  |  | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Administrative Officer and Treasurer
|               |  |  |  | (Principal Financial Officer)