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

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

DARREL WAYNE VANDERGRIFF

Plaintiff,

v.

TONY GAMBONE et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5381RBL

ORDER GRANTING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS AND

DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO

CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND

FORWARD PAYMENTS

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1), does

hereby find and ORDER. 

(1) Plaintiff’s declaration indicates he is unable to afford the court’s filing fee or give security

therefor. Accordingly, plaintiff’s application to proceed as a pauper is GRANTED. As set forth below,

an initial partial filing fee will be collected, and plaintiff is required to make monthly payments of

20 percent of the preceding months income credited to his/her account until the full amount of the

filing fee is satisfied.

(2) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and plaintiff’s approved application to proceed in forma

pauperis, the agency having custody of the above named plaintiff is directed to calculate an initial partial

filing fee equal to 20 percent of greater of -- the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or the

average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the date

of this Order. The initial partial filing fee should be forwarded to the court clerk as soon as practicable.

Subsequently, if the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, each month the agency is directed to

Case 3:06-cv-05381-RBL Document 5 Filed 07/31/06 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

Page - 2

collect and forward payments equal to 20 percent of the prisoner’s preceding month’s income credited to

the prisoner’s account. In the event that the monthly payment would reduce the prisoner’s account below

$10.00, the agency should collect and forward only that amount which would reduce the prisoner’s

account to the $10.00 level. Please note that this $10.00 limit does not apply to the initial partial filing fee

described above. Finally, the monthly payments should be collected and forwarded to the court until the

entire filing fee ($350.00) for this matter has been paid.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this Order and the General Order, and a copy

of this Order along with a copy of plaintiff’s Acknowledgment and Authorization portion of the IFP

application to the attention of the inmate account manager (IFP account manager) at the Washington State

Department of Corrections.

DATED this 31st, day of July, 2006.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05381-RBL Document 5 Filed 07/31/06 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

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

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,

Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Boulder Specialty Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge,
that:

The Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Form 10-K/A) of the Company fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and information contained in the Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |     |  |                                             
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------
|Date: April 30, 2007 |  | By: |  | /s/ James E. Lewis                          
|                     |  |     |  | James E. Lewis                              
|                     |  |     |  | Vice Chairman of the Board                  
|                     |  |     |  | (Principal financial and accounting officer)

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.
#### Melanie MCCANN, Noele Nelson, Lisa Nielson, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BRYON L. ROSQUIST, D.C., P.C., a Utah corporation; Bryon L. Rosquist, individually, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 98-4049.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

June 19, 2001.

Larry S. Jenkins; Mary Anne Q. Wood, with him on the briefs, Wood Crapo LLC, Salt Lake City, UT, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Brent O. Hatch, Johnson & Hatch, P.C., Salt Lake City, UT, for defendants-appellees.

Before LUCERO and PORFILIO, Circuit Judges, and COOK,* District Judge.

*

 The Honorable H. Dale Cook, United States Senior District Judge for the Northern District of Oklahoma, sitting by designation.

OPINION ON REMAND

LUCERO, Circuit Judge.

In *United States v. Morrison,*529 U.S. 598, 120 S.Ct. 1740, 1759, 146 L.Ed.2d 658 (2000), the Supreme Court invalidated the Civil Rights Remedies for Gender-Motivated Violence Act, 42 U.S.C. § 13981, the civil liability provision of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The Court subsequently granted certiorari and vacated and remanded this case for further consideration in light of *Morrison.*Following *Morrison,*we must affirm the district court’s dismissal of the instant action based on the Supreme Court’s invalidation of the underlying statute. The judgment of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED.

The mandate shall issue forthwith.
114 STAT. 1952 PUBLIC LAW 106–454—NOV. 7, 2000

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 5229:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

Oct. 10, considered and passed House.

Oct. 24, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 106–454

106th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 219 South

Church Street in Odum, Georgia, as the ‘‘Ruth Harris Coleman Post Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

219 South Church Street in Odum, Georgia, shall be known and

designated as the ‘‘Ruth Harris Coleman Post Office Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Ruth Harris

Coleman Post Office Building’’.

Approved November 7, 2000.

Nov. 7, 2000

[H.R. 5229]
Order entered December 10, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 13
- 00051
- CV WINSTON ACQUISITION CORP, Appellant
V. BLUE VALLEY APARTMEN TS, INC, Appellee On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District Court Dallas Coun ty, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 11
- 01373 

### O RDER
We GRANT appellant’s December 2, 2013 second motion to extend time to file appellant’s reply brief and ORDER appellant to file its reply brief no later than January 6, 201 4

. Appellant is cautioned that n o further extensions will be granted absent exigent circumstances.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS JUSTICE
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

JAMES ERNEST DICKERSON

Plaintiff,

v.

C/O KORZILIUS et al.,

Defendants

Case No. C06-5301FDB

ORDER TO PROVIDE

SERVICE DOCUMENTS

Plaintiff has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and has filed an acceptable 

complaint. There are an insufficient number of copies and no Marshal service forms on file. The

clerks office is directed to send Mr. Dickerson six Marshal service forms.

Plaintiff will fill out a form for each defendant and provide a copy of the complaint and

the form to the court on or before September 1st, 2006 or the court will recommend this action be

dismissed for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute.

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to plaintiff and note this matter for

September 1st, 2006.

DATED this 1st day of August 2006.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:06-cv-05301-FDB Document 8 Filed 08/01/06 Page 1 of 1
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 169

To designate February 3, 1998, as ‘‘Four Chaplains Day’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 27, 1998

Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mr. GRAMS, Mr. TORRICELLI, Mr. D’AMATO, Mr.

WELLSTONE, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. BOND, Mr. MOYNIHAN, Mr. LIEBERMAN,

Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. HUTCHINSON, and

Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution; which was considered

and agreed to

RESOLUTION

To designate February 3, 1998, as ‘‘Four Chaplains Day’’.

Whereas February 3, 1998, is the 55th anniversary of the

sinking of the United States Army transport Dorchester,

an event that resulted in the loss of nearly 700 lives in

1943 and for which witnesses have recounted in the Congressional Record the heroism of 4 chaplains of different

faiths, Lieutenant George L. Fox, Methodist; Lieutenant

Alexander D. Goode, Jewish; Lieutenant John P. Washington, Catholic; and Lieutenant Clark V. Poling, Dutch

Reformed;

Whereas witnesses have verified that during the approximate

18 minutes the ship was sinking after being torpedoed off

the coast of Greenland, the 4 chaplains went from soldier

to soldier calming fears and handing out life jackets and
2

•SRES 169 ATS

guiding men to safety and when there were no more life

jackets, they removed their own life jackets and gave

them to others to save their lives and were last seen armin-arm in prayer on the hull of the ship;

Whereas many of the 230 men who survived owed their lives

to these 4 chaplains, and witnesses among them recounted the unique ecumenical spirit and love for their

fellow man these 4 demonstrated that were later illustrated in a popular postage stamp issued by the United

States in 1948 with the title ‘‘Interfaith in Action’’;

Whereas Congress passed House Concurrent Resolution 90 in

1957 to honor these 4 chaplains and the men who died

with them, and President Truman and President Eisenhower issued similar proclamations calling for national

recognition and participation in memorial services

throughout the land that have been observed annually by

the American Legion on the first Sunday in February;

Whereas Congress undertook to create a special medal for

valor given to the memory of the 4 chaplains in 1960 and

never to be repeated; and

Whereas memorials to the chaplains’ heroic sacrifice abound

in many places throughout the country including the Heroes Window in the National Cathedral in Washington,

D.C.: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate—

2 (1) requests the President of the United States

3 to issue a proclamation designating February 3,

4 1998, as ‘‘Four Chaplains Day’’; and

5 (2) invites the people of the United States, of

6 all religions and creeds and in all communities, to
3

•SRES 169 ATS

1 observe this date with appropriate ceremonies, cele2 brations, and commemorations.

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 TAXATION OF COSTS -- 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

YUSEF B. SA’AD,

Plaintiff,

v.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-596RSL

TAXATION OF COSTS

Having considered briefs in support of, and in opposition to, the cost bill herein, costs in the cause

indicated above are hereby taxed against PLAINTIFF YUSEF B. SA’AD , and on behalf of

DEFENDANT in the amount of $758.22 as follows:

Requested Disallowed Allowed

I. DEPOSITION COSTS $611.60 0 $611.60

Case 2:06-cv-00596-RSL Document 57 Filed 04/22/08 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

Requested Disallowed Allowed

TAXATION OF COSTS -- 2

II. WITNESS FEES $1,238.73 $1,092.11 $146.62

Fees for witness that did not testify at trial will not be allowed. 

Dated this 22nd day of APRIL, 2008 .

A

Bruce Rifkin

Clerk, U.S. District Court

Case 2:06-cv-00596-RSL Document 57 Filed 04/22/08 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

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION

TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE 1

U.S. v. Adams, CR05-5885FDB

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1331 Broadway, Ste. 400

Tacoma, Washington 98402

(253) 593-6710

JUDGE FRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ANTHONY ADAMS,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR05-5885FDB

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

DATE 

Based on the unopposed motion of the defendant to continue the trial date, and

the reasons set forth in the sealed affidavit of defense counsel in support of the motion,

which are incorporated herein by reference, the Court makes the following findings of

fact and conclusions of law:

1. The ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best

interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A). 

2. Proceeding to trial absent adequate time for the defense to prepare would

result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(I). 

3. The defense needs additional time to explore issues of some complexity,

including all relevant issues and defenses applicable to the case, which would make it

unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or for trial itself

within the time limits established by the Speedy Trial Act and currently set for this case. 

Case 3:05-cr-05885-FDB Document 29 Filed 05/12/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION

TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE 2

U.S. v. Adams, CR05-5885FDB

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1331 Broadway, Ste. 400

Tacoma, Washington 98402

(253) 593-6710

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B(ii). 

4. Taking into account the exercise of due diligence, a continuance is necessary

to allow the defendant the reasonable time for effective preparation his defense. 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). 

NOW, THEREFORE,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the trial date is continued from June 5, 2006 to

July 31, 2006, at 9:00 am. The resulting period of delay from the current trial date of

June 5, 2006, up to and including the new trial date of July 31, 2006, is hereby excluded

for speedy trial purposes under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B).

Pre-trial motions shall be due on June 5, 2006.

Pre-trial conference shall be on July 21, 2006, at 2:00 pm.

DONE this 12th day of May, 2006. 

A

FRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented By:

/s/ Russell V. Leonard 

Russell V. Leonard 

Attorney for Defendant

Case 3:05-cr-05885-FDB Document 29 Filed 05/12/06 Page 2 of 2
Cite as 2015 Ark. 53



## SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV-14-615 EUGENE WESLEY APPELLANT V.
MARY ANN WILKINSON AND DIANE HART, LEE COUNTY CIRCUIT CLERK’S OFFICE APPELLEES Opinion Delivered February 19, 2015 PRO SE APPEAL FROM THE LEE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 39CV-13-20] HONORABLE L.T. SIMES, JUDGE AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM On February 11, 2013, appellant Eugene Wesley filed a civil rights complaint against the Lee County Circuit Court clerk and a deputy clerk, seeking declaratory judgment and money damages. He subsequently filed a motion for the defendants to produce certain documents and a motion for default judgment. On March 25, 2014, the circuit court dismissed the complaint without prejudice on the ground that no summons had been issued or served in the matter as required by Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i) (2014). The motions were declared moot. Appellant brings this appeal from the order. Rule 4(i) provides that, if service of the summons and a copy of the complaint is not made upon a defendant within 120 days after the filing of the complaint or within the period of time allowed by an extension, the action shall be dismissed without prejudice. This court has held that statutory service requirements, being in derogation of common-law rights, must be strictly construed and that compliance with them must be exact. Trusclair v. McGowan WorkingCite as 2015 Ark. 53

Partners, 2009 Ark. 203, at 3, 306 S.W.3d 428, 430 (citing Smith v. Sidney Moncrief Pontiac, Buick, GMC Co. , 353 Ark. 701, 120 S.W.3d 525 (2003))
. Appellant argues that he served a copy of the complaint on the defendants, but the record in this appeal does not reflect that summonses were ever issued or served in this matter. Accordingly, based on the record before us, we cannot say that the circuit court erred in dismissing the complaint without prejudice. Affirmed. Eugene Wesley , pro se appellant. No response.

2
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE: November 14 , 2012 TO: RI CE NESHAP Docket, EPA - HQ - OAR- 2008 - 0708 FROM: Melanie King, EPA OAQPS/SPPD/ESG SUBJECT: October 10 , 2012 Meeting Regarding Proposed Amendments to the RI CE

NESHAP **SUMMARY** A meeting was held between the EPA and the attendees listed below on October 1 0 , 2012 to discuss the comments submitted by PJM on the proposed amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines . The amendments were proposed on June 7, 2012. **ATTENDEES** Peter Tsirigotis, EPA Gary Helm , PJM Joe Goffman , EPA Paul Sotkiewicz, PJM Kevin Culligan, EPA Melanie King, EPA (b y phone)
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 ON MOTION

FOR SEVERANCE AND LEAVE TO

RENEW AND SUPPLEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff,

v.

DANIEL SILVA-CHAVEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. CR06-198L

ORDER ON MOTION

FOR SEVERANCE AND LEAVE TO

RENEW AND SUPPLEMENT

This matter comes before the Court on “Defendant Pedro Cuellar-Garcia’s Motion for

Trial Severance & for Leave to Renew & Supplement” (Dkt. # 164). At this stage of the action,

the facts are insufficient to support a severance. However, as defense counsel notes, “there has 

been insufficient time to fully investigate the case.” Motion at 3. The Court has entered a

continuance of the trial in order to give the parties more time. Because the facts have not been

fully developed, the Court will allow defendant to renew the motion later. For these reasons,

defendant’s motion is DENIED without prejudice with leave to renew and supplement.

DATED this 31st day of July, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cr-00198-RSL Document 222 Filed 07/31/06 Page 1 of 1
`[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 32 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]






                                                        Calendar No. 10
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 32

     To authorize the printing of a collection of the rules of the 
                       committees of the Senate.


_______________________________________________________________________


                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 28, 1997

 Mr. Warner, from the Committee on Rules and Administration, reported 
  the following original resolution; which was placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
     To authorize the printing of a collection of the rules of the 
                       committees of the Senate.

    Resolved, That a collection of the rules of the committees of the 
Senate, together with related materials, be printed as a Senate 
document, and that there be printed 600 additional copies of such 
document for the use of the Committee on Rules and Administration.




                                                        Calendar No. 10

105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               S. RES. 32

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

     To authorize the printing of a collection of the rules of the 
                        committees of the Senate

_______________________________________________________________________

                            January 28, 1997

                         Placed on the calendar`
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 WITHDRAWAL AND 

SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL 

U.S. v. Fugitt, CR05-5896(RBL) – page 1

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1331 Broadway , Suite 400

Tacoma, Washington 98402

JUDGE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

WILLIAM GARY FUGITT,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR05-5896RBL

ORDER FOR WITHDRAWAL AND

SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL

The Court having considered the Motion for Withdrawal and Substitution of

Counsel, and the accompanying Affidavit of Miriam Schwartz and Memorandum in

Support of the Motion;

NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Federal Public

Defender and Assistant Federal Public Defender Miriam Schwartz are permitted to

withdraw as defense counsel in this matter; new defense counsel shall be appointed from

the CJA panel to represent the defendant. 

Withdrawing counsel shall notify the CJA panel coordinator immediately of this

order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 5th day of October, 2006. ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/s/ Miriam F. Schwartz MIRIAM F. SCHWARTZ

Attorney for Defendant

Case 3:05-cr-05896-RBL Document 29 Filed 10/05/06 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,565,043
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,571,059
<ALLOWANCES>                                    36,000
<INVENTORY>                                    921,880
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,869,261
<PP&E>                                       2,727,591
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,429,029
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,937,570
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,141,756
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        75,939
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,669,875
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,937,570
<SALES>                                      2,500,312
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,500,312
<CGS>                                        1,288,410
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,288,410
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                654,526
<INCOME-TAX>                                   200,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            454,526
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   454,526
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12




</TABLE>