alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 57046.

petition 6851-R (Los Angeles).

#### Hori Bros. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson J.

The evidence disclosed that it was agreed between the importer and the customs authorities that entry would be made on the basis of the purchase prices in Japan, such as were used in previous importations of similar shoes, and that the appraiser would appraise the shoes upon the basis of the American selling prices in accordance with a proclamation by the President of the United States, which, in effect, increased the value of such shoes. An appeal for reappraisement was filed but was not brought to trial, having been held pending the outcome of the proceedings in another reappraisement covering the same issue. When the appraiser’s finding that the American selling price under the proclamation was the proper value for such shoes was upheld by the court, the appeal for reappraisement was abandoned. From the evidence presented it was held .that there was no intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser .as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
## F I FTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5 D 20 22

- 1 1 81 LT Case No. 2019

- CA

- 1937

_____________________________ C HRISTOPHER A. C ROUCH , J R

. , and L ISA C ROUCH Appellant s ,

v.
N EWREZ , LLC d/b/a , Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County

. Victor J. Musleh , Judge

. Blake J. Fredrickson , of Fredrickson Law Group, P.A. , Tampa , for Appellant s
. Michael T. Ruff , of Padgett Law Group , Tallahassee , for Appellee.

May 21, 2024

P ER C URIAM

. A FFIRMED

.

M AKAR , K ILBANE , and P RATT , JJ., concur
.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 820 

Recognizing and celebrating the commitment of the Student Conservation 

Association to the United States national parks and public lands. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 13, 2007 

Mr. KIND submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing and celebrating the commitment of the Student 

Conservation Association to the United States national 

parks and public lands. 

Whereas Elizabeth Cushman Titus Putnam founded the Student Conservation Association in 1957 to provide opportunities for young people to learn about environmental 

conservation and put their knowledge to work by volunteering in national parks; 

Whereas the Student Conservation Association has helped to 

protect vital habitats, threatened wildlife, and other atrisk resources in the United States parks, forests, and 

urban green spaces; 

Whereas since its inception, the Student Conservation Association has grown to become the largest conservation 

service program in the United States, placing volunteers 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HRES 820 IH 

in all 50 States and internationally in Canada, Mexico, 

Brazil, Germany, and Latvia; 

Whereas the Student Conservation Association has nearly 

50,000 alumni, many of whom have dedicated their professional careers to environmental stewardship and preservation; 

Whereas in 2005, volunteers of the Student Conservation Association performed more than 1,600,000 hours of service; 

Whereas the Student Conservation Association has been recognized for its achievements in conservation and youth 

development by the White House, the National Park 

Service, the United States Forest Service, the Wilderness 

Society, the National Wildlife Federation, the National 

Fire Plan Council, and the Garden Club of America; and 

Whereas the people of the United States owe a debt of gratitude to the Student Conservation Association, whose outstanding work to preserve and protect the United States 

natural treasures helps ensure that they will be available 

to enrich future generations of the people of the United 

States: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) applauds the Student Conservation Associa3 tion for its decades of dedicated service to con4 serving the United States national parks and public 

5 lands; and 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

•HRES 820 IH 

1 (2) expresses its best wishes to the Student 

2 Conservation Association for its continued success 

3 and growth. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
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

(PROPOSED) ORDER GRANTING AGREED MOTION

TO CONTINUE TRIAL & EXTEND PTM’s DUE DATE 

(Vladimir Regalado; #06-175MJP)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

1 (206) 553-1100

 JUDGE MARSHA J. PECHMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

VLADIMIR REGALADO,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR 06-175 MJP

ORDER GRANTING 

AGREED MOTION TO CONTINUE

PRETRIAL MOTIONS FILING DATE

AND TRIAL DATE

THE COURT having considered the stipulated motion of the parties to continue the trial

date and extend the due date of the pretrial motions, and the records and files herein, the Court

hereby makes the following findings:

1. The Court finds that a failure to grant the continuances would deny counsel the

reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due

diligence, within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(ii).

2. The Court further finds that the ends of justice will be served by ordering the

continuances in this case and that the continuances are necessary to ensure effective trial

preparation and that these factors outweigh the best interests of the public in a more speedy trial,

within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the trial date be continued from October 31, 2006,

to January 16, 2007, and that the due date for pretrial motions be extended from September 21,

Case 2:06-cr-00175-MJP Document 20 Filed 10/03/06 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

(PROPOSED) ORDER GRANTING AGREED MOTION

TO CONTINUE TRIAL & EXTEND PTM’s DUE DATE 

(Vladimir Regalado; #06-175MJP)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

2 (206) 553-1100

2006, to November 18, 2006.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the period of time from the current trial date of October

31, 2006, up to and including the new proposed trial date of January 16, 2007, shall be

excludable time pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq. 

DONE this 3rd day of October, 2006.

/S/Marsha J. Pechman 

THE HONORABLE MARSHA J. PECHMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented by:

s/ Timothy R. Lohraff

WSBA # 32145

Attorney for Vladimir Regalado

Federal Public Defender’s Office

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, WA 98101

Phone: (206) 553-1100

Fax: (206) 553-0120

tim_lohraff@fd.org

s/ Vincent Lombardi

Assistant United States Attorney

Via E-Mail Approval

Case 2:06-cr-00175-MJP Document 20 Filed 10/03/06 Page 2 of 2
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,  AS MASTER SERVICER 1123 CERTIFICATION OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE **Re:  Merrill Auto Trust Securitization 2008-1**Pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of June 30, 2008, among Merrill Auto Trust Securitization 2008-1, as Issuer, ML Asset Backed Corporation, as Depositor, and U.S. Bank National Association, as Master Servicer, the undersigned Officer, to the best of his knowledge, hereby certifies to the following obligations as set forth in Item 1123 of Regulation AB applicable to it: (i) a review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding calendar year or portion thereof and of its performance under this Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision and, (B) to the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, such party has fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement, in all material respects throughout such year or portion thereof. U.S. Bank National Association, as Master Servicer _/s/Bryan R. Calder__ Name:  Bryan R. Calder Title:   President Date: March 26, 2008
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1380 

KA 09-00741 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND SCONIERS, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V ORDER

JACINTO CEDENO, ALSO KNOWN AS THE GENERAL,

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

(APPEAL NO. 1.) 

 

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (DAVID R. JUERGENS OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DANIEL GROSS OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a new sentence of the Supreme Court, Monroe County

(Harold L. Galloway, J.), rendered February 9, 2009 imposed upon

defendant’s conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in

the first degree (two counts), and criminal possession of a controlled

substance in the first degree (two counts). Defendant was resentenced

pursuant to the 2004 Drug Law Reform Act. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the sentence so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Entered: January 2, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
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

ORDER DENYING STIPULATED

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

PAGE -1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

TUAN DUNG TRAN,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 06-128M

ORDER DENYING EXTENSION

OF TIME FOR INDICTMENT

On April 7, 2006, the defendant filed a Waiver of Right to a Speedy Indictment (Dkt.

#14) for the period up to and including May 30, 2006. On May 1, 2006, defendant again

filed a Waiver of Right to a Speedy Indictment (Dkt. #17) for the period up to and including

June 30, 2006, and submitted a Motion to Extend Time for Indictment in support of this

Waiver. No explanation was given as for the requested extension.

Congress “did not intend the ‘ends of justice’ exclusion to be granted as a matter of

course but rather [intended it] to be used sparingly and only when necessary.” United States

v. Lewis, 980 F.2d 555, 560 (9th Cir. 1992) (internal citations omitted). Hence, an “ends of

justice” exclusion may be granted only for a specific duration when “justified by the record

with reference to the facts.” United States v. Ramirez-Cortez, 213 F.3d 1149, 1154 (9th Cir.

1999) (internal citations and punctuation omitted). Generalized assertions that the “ends of

justice” will be satisfied by the granting of a continuance are insufficient. Id. at 1154-55. 

Case 2:06-mj-00128-MJB Document 21 Filed 05/15/06 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

ORDER DENYING STIPULATED

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

PAGE -2

Here, the defendant has provided no evidence, nor adduced any facts from the record

sufficient to justify granting a continuance. An ongoing plea agreement negotiation is not a

factor sufficient for this Court to find that granting a continuance will satisfy the “ends of

justice.” Id. at 1155-56 (citing United States v. Perez-Reveles, 715 F.2d 1348, 1352 (9th Cir.

1983)). Defendant’s motion is therefore DENIED.

DATED this 15th day of May, 2006.

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-mj-00128-MJB Document 21 Filed 05/15/06 Page 2 of 2
Before the Second Division,

November 14, 1962

No. 67195.

protests 59/30752, etc. (New York).

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

Lawrence, Judge:

Importations of miniature knives, flimsily constructed and inexpensive, contained in simple leather sheaths, covered by the protests enumerated in the schedule, attached to and made a part of this decision, were classified by the collector of customs as hunting knives in paragraph 355 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.O. § 1001, par. 355), as modified, at various rates of duty, depending upon the date of entry.

Plaintiffs claim that the articles are not hunting knives and should be classified as articles in chief value of metal in paragraph 397 of said act (19 U.S.C. §1001, par. 397), as modified, and dutiable at the rate applicable at the date of entry.

It was stipulated by adversary counsel that the merchandise is composed wholly or in chief value of steel, not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, or colored with gold lacquer.

The items in controversy are represented by plaintiffs’ exhibits 1, 2, 4, 5, and collective exhibit 3.

Upon motion by plaintiffs, the record in the case of *M. Pressner & Co.*v. *United States,*44 Cust. Ct. 10, C.D. 2145, was incorporated herein. Exhibit 1 in said case is similar in material respects to the exhibits in the present ease. While some of the knives in the instant case have handles covered with wood, others are covered with different materials.

Plaintiffs introduced the testimony of three witnesses, all of whom were acquainted with the character, quality, and uses of the subject merchandise. They established to our satisfaction, that the articles in controversy could not be used as hunting knives and that they differ in no material respects from *302exhibit 1 in the *Pressner*case, wherein the classification as hunting knives was overruled and the claim for classification as articles, not specially provided for, composed wholly or in chief value of base metal, was sustained.

Upon the combined records, we find and hold that the items in controversy are not hunting knives within the meaning of that term, as used in paragraph 355, *supra,*and sustain the claim of plaintiffs that the merchandise should be classified as articles wholly or in chief value of steel, not specially provided for, in paragraph 397, as modified, and subjected to the rate of duty applicable, depending upon the date of entry. Our decision in the *Pressner*case followed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 6, 2012*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.202 U.S. Deposits in Foreign Countries** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

JAME S CLEVELAND MANY WHITE

HORSES, a.k.a. J.C. Many White Horses,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 17

- 30224

D.C. No. 9:07

- cr

- 00063

- DWM

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Montana

Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 15, 2018 **

Before: SILVERMAN, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

James Cleveland Many White Horses appeals from the district court’s

judgment and challenges the 12

- month custodial sentence and 10

- year term of

supervised release imposed upon revocation of supervised release . Pursuant to

Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 73 8 (1967), Many White Horses ’s counsel has filed

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAY 18 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 30224

a brief stating that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw

as counsel of record. We have provided Many White Horses the opportunity to file

a pro se supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has

been filed.

Our independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S.

75, 80 (1988), discloses no arguable grounds for relief on direct appeal.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

AFFIRMED.
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 OF CONSOLIDATION - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

DENNIS M. EGEMO, 

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-317RSL

Case No. C06-320RSL

ORDER OF CONSOLIDATION

 

DONALD CAMERON JONES, 

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ stipulation requesting consolidation of

related cases (Dkt. #20). The parties seek to consolidate Egemo v. USA, Case No. C06-317RSL

with Jones v. USA, Case No. C06-320RSL.

The Court finds that these cases are appropriate for consolidation under Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 42(a) because the actions involve common questions of law and fact, and the

Case 2:06-cv-00320-RSL Document 26 Filed 03/20/07 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

1

 The parties requested a February 1, 2008 trial date. The Court, however, schedules

trials to begin on a Monday.

ORDER OF CONSOLIDATION - 2

interests of judicial economy will be served by consolidation. The Court therefore GRANTS the

motion to consolidate and orders that the cases be consolidated pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a).

The cases shall be consolidated for all purposes, including trial. The Clerk of the Court is

directed to issue an Amended Minute Order Setting Trial and Related Dates that shall apply to

the consolidated cases. The amended order shall include a February 4, 2008 trial date.1

 All

pleadings hereafter filed in these causes shall be filed and docketed under Case No. CO6-

317RSL.

DATED this 20th day of March, 2007.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge 

Case 2:06-cv-00320-RSL Document 26 Filed 03/20/07 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

ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

SUNDOG LLC, 

Plaintiff,

v.

SUN ISLAND INTERNATIONAL, INC., 

Defendant.

No. C06-562P

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The parties have filed a pleading titled “Status of Settlement” with the Court, which indicates

that the parties have reached a settlement. (Dkt. No. 12). However, the parties indicate that their

settlement is contingent upon the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) taking certain

action with respect to one of the trademarks at issue in this case. The parties expect the USPTO to

take such action within five months.

The trial date in this matter is September 17, 2007, a date which is six months away. A

number of pretrial deadlines fall within the next five months, including but not limited to the deadline

for expert reports, the discovery deadline, the dispositive motions deadline, and the deadline for the

settlement conference. The Court does not expect the parties to meet those deadlines if they have

reached a settlement in principle of this matter that is contingent on the USPTO taking certain actions

Case 2:06-cv-00562-MJP Document 13 Filed 03/20/07 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

ORDER - 2

with respect to one of the trademarks at issue in the case. However, the Court also will not leave this

action pending on its docket as an active case if the parties will not meet all pretrial deadlines.

Therefore, based on the parties’ notice of the status of settlement, the Court will ORDER that

this action and all claims asserted herein be DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs to any

party. However, any party may move to reopen this case if the parties’ settlement is not perfected,

provided that such motion is filed within 180 days of the date of this order. If the USPTO has not

taken the necessary action within five months of the date of this order, the parties may submit a

stipulation and proposed order to extend the deadline to move to reopen the case. Any trial date and

pretrial dates previously set are hereby VACATED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of March, 2007.

s/Marsha J. Pechman 

Marsha J. Pechman

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00562-MJP Document 13 Filed 03/20/07 Page 2 of 2
# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

April 18, 2008

Before

JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge

KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge

DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

No. 05

‐ 4247

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appeal from the United States

District Court for the Western

Plaintiff

‐ Appellee, District of Wisconsin.

v. No. 05 CR 116

LEAVIE T. SCOTT, Barbara B. Crabb

, Chief Judge

.

Defendant

‐ Appellant.

O R D E R

This matter is before the court on remand from the Supreme Court of the United

States. On January 7, 2008, the Supreme Court vacated the judgment of this court and

remanded the case to this court for further consideration in light of Kimbrough v. United

States, 552 U.S.

___, 128 S. Ct. 558 (2007). NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1No. 05-4247 Page 2

In their statements filed in accordance with this court’s Circuit Rule 54, the

parties agree that this case should be remanded to the district court for resentencing.

We agree. The defendant adequately preserved the issue of the unwarranted

sentencing disparity between crack and cocaine; he is entitled to be resentenced by the

district court under the standard set forth in Kimbrough.

Accordingly, the sentence of the district court is vacated and the case is

remanded for proceedings consistent with this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003

     In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit Fund III, L.P. (the "Partnership") for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 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  2003,  I,  Thomas  J.  Riha,  Chief
Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., 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,  except to the extent
          that such  provisions  require the filing of an opinion of registiered
          public  accountants to accompany the  Partnership's  annual  financial
          statements; 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 21, 2005