alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The Honorable D. Brook Bartlett, Chief Judge, United States 1

District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

___________

No. 96-1276

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 * Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

 * Western District of Missouri.

Conrad Jules Braun, * 

 * [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: October 2, 1996

 Filed: October 4, 1996

___________

Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Conrad J. Braun appeals the district court's order denying his

1

motion for return of property, denying his motion for production of

documents, and granting the government's application for writ of execution.

We affirm.

In April 1994, Braun pleaded guilty to several counts of mail fraud,

wire fraud, and interstate transportation of stolen monies. He committed

these offenses while operating the Gold Standard Corporation (GSC), of

which he was sole owner, president, and manager. In a written plea

agreement, Braun agreed that the sentencing court could order restitution

in the full amount of loss and could order disposition of GSC's assets,

with pro rata distribution of the proceeds to victim investors, and he

agreed to
-2-

assist in the disposition of the assets. As part of the sentence later

imposed, the district court ordered restitution of $1,966,694.19. On

direct appeal, we affirmed. United States v. Braun, 60 F.3d 451 (8th Cir.

1995).

In April 1995, Braun moved under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure

41(e) for the return of property seized pursuant to the February 1993

search of GSC; Braun had not challenged the search during his prosecution.

Braun then filed a motion for the production of documents, asking the court

to order the government to provide supporting documentation regarding the

seized property. In October 1995, the government applied for a writ of

execution, seeking authorization to sell specified GSC assets and to

distribute the proceeds to Braun's victims. The district court granted the

application and denied Braun's motions.

 A postconviction filing for return of property seized in connection

with a criminal case is treated as a civil equitable action, which the

district court where the claimant was tried has ancillary jurisdiction to

hear. Thompson v. Covington, 47 F.3d 974, 975 (8th Cir. 1995) (per

curiam). We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in

denying Braun relief. We agree with the court that, in the plea agreement,

Braun waived any objection to the distribution of GSC's assets. Cf. United

States v. Osborn, 58 F.3d 387, 388-89 (8th Cir. 1995) (affirming

restitution order where defendant did not object to it at sentencing, and

plea agreement had provided for restitution). Consequently, the district

court also did not err in denying the motion for production of documents,

or in granting the application for writ of execution.

Accordingly, we affirm.
-3-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

CAROLYN NICOLET,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner,

Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

Case No. C05-5792RBL

REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION TO DENY

APPLICATION TO PROCEED

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Noted for February 10, 2006

This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Karen L. Strombom pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1) and Local MJR 3 and 4. This matter comes before the court on plaintiff’s filing of an application

to proceed in forma pauperis and a complaint to review and set aside a decision of the Social Security

Administration under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Because plaintiff's application indicates she has sufficient

income with which to pay the $250.00 filing fee, the undersigned recommends that the court deny the

application.

DISCUSSION

The district court may permit indigent litigants to proceed in forma pauperis upon completion of a

proper affidavit of indigency. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). However, the court has broad discretion in

denying an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Weller v. Dickson, 314 F.2d 598 (9th Cir. 1963),

cert. denied, 375 U.S. 845 (1963).

Case 3:05-cv-05792-RBL Document 3 Filed 01/13/06 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

27

28

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Page - 2

By requesting the court to proceed in forma pauperis, plaintiff is asking the government to incur

the filing fee because she allegedly is unable to afford the costs necessary to proceed with her cause of

action. In her application, however, plaintiff states that she receives an “indefinite” pension in the amount

of $1,121.00 per month. (Dkt. #1). While the undersigned recognizes that $1,121.00 per month does not

constitute a substantial income, given that there are no other persons who are dependant upon plaintiff for

support, it does not seem unreasonable to expect her to pay the required filing fee. 

CONCLUSION

Because it is reasonable for plaintiff to incur the costs to proceed with this cause of action, the

undersigned recommends that the court deny her application to proceed in forma pauperis. Accordingly,

the undersigned also recommends that the court order plaintiff to pay the required filing fee within thirty

(30) days of the court's order. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, the

parties shall have ten (10) days from service of this Report and Recommendation to file written objections

thereto. See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 6. Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of those objections for

purposes of appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Accommodating the time limit imposed by Rule

72(b), the clerk is directed set this matter for consideration on February 10, 2006, as noted in the caption. 

Dated this 17th day of January, 2006.

A

Karen L. Strombom

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05792-RBL Document 3 Filed 01/13/06 Page 2 of 2
# Official Journal C 201A/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.CA2010.201.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 201A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5323 July 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.CA2010.201.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 201A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5323 July 2010

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Corrigenda |
| 2010/C 201A/01 | Corrigendum to the notice of competition EPSO/AD/177/10 — Administrators (AD 5) (OJ C 64 A, 16.3.2010) | 1 |
| 2010/C 201A/02 | Corrigendum to the notice of competitions EPSO/AD/178-179/10 (OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010) | 2 |
| 2010/C 201A/03 | Corrigendum to the notice of competitions EPSO/AD/180-181-182/10 (OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010) | 3 |

Notice No

Contents

page

Corrigenda

Corrigenda

2010/C 201A/01

Corrigendum to the notice of competition EPSO/AD/177/10 — Administrators (AD 5) (OJ C 64 A, 16.3.2010)

(OJ C 64 A, 16.3.2010)

1

2010/C 201A/02

Corrigendum to the notice of competitions EPSO/AD/178-179/10 (OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010)

(OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010)

2

2010/C 201A/03

Corrigendum to the notice of competitions EPSO/AD/180-181-182/10 (OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010)

(OJ C 110 A, 29.4.2010)

3

---

REVIEW OF COMPETITION C A OJs

Please find below the list of C A published during the present year.

Unless otherwise indicated, OJs are published in all language versions.

| 5 | (FR) |
| --- | --- |
| 9 | |
| 19 | (FR) |
| 23 | (DE/ES/PT) |
| 28 | |
| 48 | |
| 53 | |
| 56 | |
| 57 | |
| 60 | |
| 61 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 62 | |
| 64 | |
| 66 | (BG/RO) |
| 67 | (ES) |
| 70 | (PT) |
| 73 | (FI) |
| 74 | (SV) |
| 91 | |
| 95 | |
| 104 | |
| 110 | |
| 116 | (ET) |
| 119 | |
| 129 | (EL) |
| 137 | (LT/LV/MT) |
| 138 | (BG/CS/LT/PL/RO/SK) |
| 143 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 144 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 146 | (DA/FI/MT) |
| 147 | (FI) |
| 149 | (IT) |
| 150 | (BG/CS/LT/PL/RO/SK) |
| 151 | |
| 155 | |
| 156 | (PL) |
| 157 | |
| 163 | |
| 164 | |
| 171 | (IT) |
| 178 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 184 | |
| 188 | (DA/DE/EN/FR/SL) |
| 190 | |
| 191 | |
| 192 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 196 | (BG/EN/NL/RO/SL) |
| 201 | |

5

(FR)

9

19

(FR)

23

(DE/ES/PT)

28

48

53

56

57

60

61

(DE/EN/FR)

62

64

66

(BG/RO)

67

(ES)

70

(PT)

73

(FI)

74

(SV)

91

95

104

110

116

(ET)

119

129

(EL)

137

(LT/LV/MT)

138

(BG/CS/LT/PL/RO/SK)

143

(DE/EN/FR)

144

(DE/EN/FR)

146

(DA/FI/MT)

147

(FI)

149

(IT)

150

(BG/CS/LT/PL/RO/SK)

151

155

156

(PL)

157

163

164

171

(IT)

178

(DE/EN/FR)

184

188

(DA/DE/EN/FR/SL)

190

191

192

(DE/EN/FR)

196

(BG/EN/NL/RO/SL)

201

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

EN
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 198 (Monday, October 16, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 71345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22749]


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

ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION


Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) Notice of 
Vacancy

AGENCY: U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

ACTION: Notice of vacancy.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) and the Charter 
of the EAC Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC), the EAC 
is posting this notice of vacancy for a Board of Advisors 
representative to the TGDC. The vacancy shall be filled jointly by the 
EAC and the Director of the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST).

ADDRESSES: Pursuant to the TGDC Charter, the EAC will post the notice 
on the EAC website: https://www.eac.gov. Interested Board of Advisors 
members should contact the Alternate Designated Federal Official by 
email, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6310011102071a230602004d040c15"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e390819182879aa3868280cd848c95">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

TGDC Appointment Process

    The Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) is a non-
discretionary Federal Advisory Committee established by the Help 
America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), Public Law 107-252, 116 Stat. 1666 
(2002). The TGDC assists the EAC in developing the Voluntary Voting 
System Guidelines (VVSG). The chairperson of the TGDC is the director 
of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The TGDC 
is composed of 14 other members appointed jointly by EAC and the 
director of NIST.
    HAVA mandates that the 14 other members appointed jointly by the 
EAC and NIST must include an equal number of members of the EAC 
Standards Board, members of the EAC Board of Advisors, and members of 
the Architectural and Transportation Barrier Compliance Board. The TGDC 
Charter requires that notice of vacancies on the Committee for those 
individuals jointly appointed by EAC and NIST be published in the 
Federal Register as well as on the Commission's website. Pursuant to 
HAVA and the TGDC charter, the EAC is publishing this notice of vacancy 
on the TGDC for a representative of the EAC Board of Advisors. This 
vacancy shall be filled through a joint appointment of a current member 
of the EAC Board of Advisors by the EAC and NIST.

Camden Kelliher,
Deputy General Counsel, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
[FR Doc. 2023-22749 Filed 10-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 1 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 2 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 3 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 4 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 5 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 6 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 7 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 8 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 9 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 10 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 11 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 12 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 13 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 14 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 15 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 16 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 17 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 18 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 19 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 20 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 21 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 22 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 23 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 24 of 25
Case 2:06-cv-00667-JCC Document 3 Filed 05/12/06 Page 25 of 25
No. 68528.

protest 63/1041 (Los Angeles).

#### Dan Brechner & Company, Inc., and Frank P. Dow Co., Inc., of L.A. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of tele scopes similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 67949, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 57007.

protest 185940-K (New York).

#### China Trade & Industrial Service, Inc. *v.*United States,

*307Opinion by

Johnson, J.

From an examination of the papers in the case the court was unable to find anything to overcome the presumption of correctness of the collector’s classification. The protest was therefore overruled.
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 198

Designating April 1, 1998, as ‘‘National Breast Cancer Survivors’ Day’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 18, 1998

Mr. MACK (for himself, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. LOTT, Mr. DASCHLE, Mr.

HATCH, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. ALLARD, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. BOND, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. BREAUX,

Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BRYAN, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. CHAFEE, Mr.

CLELAND, Mr. COCHRAN, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. COVERDELL, Mr. CRAIG,

Mr. D’AMATO, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. DODD, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. DORGAN,

Mr. DURBIN, Mr. ENZI, Mr. FAIRCLOTH, Mr. FORD, Mr. FRIST, Mr.

GLENN, Mr. GORTON, Mr. GRAMM, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. GREGG, Mr.

HAGEL, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. KOHL, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. INOUYE, Mr.

JEFFORDS, Mr. JOHNSON, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. KERREY, Ms. LANDRIEU,

Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. LUGAR, Mr.

MCCONNELL, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. MOYNIHAN, Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN, Mr.

MURKOWSKI, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. NICKLES, Mr. REED, Mr. ROBB, Mr.

ROCKEFELLER, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SMITH of New

Hampshire, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Ms. SNOWE, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. THOMAS, Mr. TORRICELLI, Mr. WARNER, Mr. WELLSTONE,

Mr. COATS, Mr. HUTCHINSON, Mr. FEINGOLD, and Mr. WYDEN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the

Judiciary

MARCH 19, 1998

Reported by Mr. HATCH, without amendment

MARCH 20, 1998

Considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Designating April 1, 1998, as ‘‘National Breast Cancer

Survivors’ Day’’.
2

SRES 198 ATS

Whereas breast cancer strikes an estimated 178,700 women

and 1,600 men in the United States annually;

Whereas breast cancer strikes 1 out of every 9 American

women during an average woman’s lifetime;

Whereas breast cancer is the leading cause of death among

American women between the ages of 35 and 54;

Whereas during this decade, it is estimated that more than

1,800,000 women and 12,000 men will be diagnosed with

breast cancer in the United States;

Whereas when breast cancer is detected at an early stage, the

5-year survival rate is 97 percent;

Whereas according to the United States Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention, the percentage of American

women who die from breast cancer has begun to decline;

Whereas according to the United States Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention, the mortality rate among American women with breast cancer decreased during the period from 1990 to 1995; and

Whereas breast cancer survivors have shown tremendous

courage and determination in the face of adversity: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate—

2 (1) designates April 1, 1998, as ‘‘National

3 Breast Cancer Survivors’ Day’’; and

4 (2) requests the President to issue a proclama5 tion calling upon the people of the United States to
3

SRES 198 ATS

1 observe the day with appropriate programs and ac2 tivities.

Æ
#### John Patrick MCSHEFFREY, Appellant, v. EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS, et al., Appellees.

No. 00-5068.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

May 30, 2001.

Before WILLIAMS, SENTELLE, and RANDOLPH, Circuit Judges.

*4
      *JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. The court has determined that the issues presented occasion no need for an opinion. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 36; D.C.Cir. Rule 36(b). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed February 18, 1999, granting summary judgment in favor of appellee Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms be affirmed substantially for the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion accompanying that order; and that the district court’s order filed January 27, 2000, granting summary judgment in favor of appellee Executive Office of the United States Attorney be affirmed substantially for the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion accompanying that order. It is

FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed February 18, 1999, granting summary judgment in favor of the Bureau of Prisons be affirmed in part and be vacated and remanded in part. The determination that the motion to remove the eight pages relating to a psychological test and its results was moot is hereby affirmed. The determination that the Bureau of Prisons’ terse description was sufficient to justify withholding in their entirety the nine documents identified as National Crime Information Center background checks is hereby vacated and remanded for further proceedings. In addition to determining what information in the these documents is actually protected under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(C), the district court is to determine whether any portion of these documents can be segregated for release. *See Trans-Pacific Policing Agreement v. United States Customs Serv.,*177 F.3d 1022, 1028 (D.C.Cir.1999); *Krikorian v. Department of State,*984 F.2d 461, 467 (D.C.Cir.1993). It is

FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed April 7, 2000, be affirmed substantially for the reasons stated therein.

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.
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 - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

CARL MEALING,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF RIDGEFIELD, WASHINGTON;

RIDGEFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT;

RIDGEFIELD POLICE CHIEF BRUCE

HALL; BRUCE HALL in his individual

capacity; RIDGEFIELD CITY MANAGER

GEORGE FOX, and GEORGE FOX in his

individual capacity,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5778FDB

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF ADVISE

COURT OF INTENTIONS RE

PROSECUTION OF THIS CASE 

 In an earlier order regarding Plaintiff’s representation, entered February 23, 2007, this Court

stated that it would address Plaintiff’s counsel’s motion to withdraw after he filed responses to the

pending summary judgment motions. Plaintiff’s counsel, Jay Trumble, having filed responses on

behalf of Plaintiff to the pending motions for summary judgment, and the Court now having entered

orders granting the summary judgment motions filed by Defendants City of Ridgefield and Ridgefield

Police Department, and Bruce Hall, and denying Plaintiff’s motion for a voluntary dismissal, now

addresses Mr. Trumble’s motion to withdraw. Mr. Trumble will be allowed to withdraw once

Plaintiff Mealing files a document stating his intentions regarding this case. 

Case 3:05-cv-05778-FDB Document 97 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 ORDER - 2

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED: 

1. Plaintiff Carl Mealing shall file a document by no later than Friday, April 6, 2007,

stating whether he will proceeding with this case pro se (representing himself) or

whether he has employed new counsel who shall by Friday, April 6, 2007 enter an

appearance. Failure to abide by the Court’s order may result in sanctions, including

dismissal of the remainder of this cause of action. 

2. Once Plaintiff has complied with the foregoing directive, the Court will enter an Order

allowing Mr. Trumble to withdraw. 

DATED this 19th day of March, 2007.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05778-FDB Document 97 Filed 03/20/07 Page 2 of 2
|   | (1) | To my knowledge, the report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                         | Company Name |                    |
|------------------------------|--------------|-------------------------|
|                         |         |                    |   |
| Date:  October 20, 2009 | By:          | /s/ Chene Gardner  |   |
|                         |         | Chene Gardner           |   |
|                         |         | Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                         |         | Chief Executive Officer |   |
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 193 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 193

Designating December 13, 1998, as ``National Children's Memorial Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 9, 1998

Mr. Reid submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Designating December 13, 1998, as ``National Children's Memorial Day''.

Whereas approximately 79,000 infants, children, teenagers, and young adults die 
        each year in the United States;
Whereas the death of a child is one of the greatest tragedies suffered by a 
        family; and
Whereas support and understanding are critical to the healing process of a 
        bereaved family: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates December 13, 1998, as ``National Children's 
        Memorial Day''; and
            (2) requests that the President issue a proclamation 
        designating December 13, 1998, as ``National Children's 
        Memorial Day'' and calls on the people of the United States to 
        observe the day with appropriate ceremonies and activities in 
        remembrance of infants, children, teenagers, and young adults 
        who have died.
                                 <all>
```