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

[PROPOSED] ORDER ON UNOPPOSED MOTION 

TO MODIFY CONDITIONS OF PRETRIAL RELEASE - 1

(Leanna Oxford; CR 06-5309 JKA)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Ave., Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

(206) 553-1100

 MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARY ALICE THEILER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

LEANNA M. OXFORD,

Defendant. _________________________________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR 06-5309 JKA

[PROPOSED] ORDER ON MOTION

TO MODIFY CONDITIONS OF

PRETRIAL RELEASE

The Court, having reviewed the defendant’s unopposed motion to modify

conditions of pretrial release, hereby finds that the reasons set forth therein for the

requested relief establish that the ends of justice are served by granting the modification

of conditions. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is granted; and, 

//

//

//

//

Case 3:06-cr-05309-JKA Document 21 Filed 05/26/06 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 ON UNOPPOSED MOTION 

TO MODIFY CONDITIONS OF PRETRIAL RELEASE - 2

(Leanna Oxford; CR 06-5309 JKA)

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1601 Fifth Ave., Suite 700

Seattle, Washington 98101

(206) 553-1100

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant’s conditions of pretrial release be

modified to remove the condition of electronic monitoring.

DONE this 26th day of May, 2006.

s/ James P. Donohue 

for: Mary Alice Theiler

United States Magistrate Judge

Presented by:

s/ Robert H. Gombiner

WSBA # 16059

Assistant Federal Public Defender

Attorney for Leanna M. Oxford

Federal Public Defender’s Office

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700

Seattle, WA 98101

Phone: (206) 553-1100

Fax: (206) 553-0120

robert_gombiner@fd.org

Case 3:06-cr-05309-JKA Document 21 Filed 05/26/06 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 - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

KEITH L. NASH,

Plaintiff,

v.

DOUG WADDINGTON, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5127 RJB/KLS

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (Dkt. # 156) of the Court’s prior

Order (Dkt. # 148), which denied Plaintiff’s motion for counsel. Having carefully reviewed

Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, the Court finds that it should be denied. 

DISCUSSION

Motions for reconsideration are disfavored and will ordinarily be denied in the “absence of a

showing of manifest error in the prior ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority which

could not have been brought to the court’s attention earlier with reasonable diligence.” Local Rule

CR 7(h)(1). 

Plaintiff argues that reconsideration is necessary because this Court lacked jurisdiction to

deny his motion and because the Court overlooked the fact that his Amended Complaint contains

Case 3:06-cv-05127-RJB Document 165 Filed 09/04/07 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

claims in addition to denial of access and wrongful infraction mentioned in the Court’s Order

denying counsel, which require the assistance of counsel. (Dkt. # 148). The Court has addressed

Plaintiff’s position regarding this Court’s jurisdiction on numerous occasions and found it to be

without merit. 

The Court is also aware that Plaintiff claims that Defendants engaged in acts of retaliation,

conspiracy, harassment, and infringement. However, this does not change the Court’s initial

analysis that Plaintiff has been able to adequately articulate his claims, and engage in extensive

motions practice and discovery, all without the assistance of counsel in this case. (Dkt. 148 at 2). 

Plaintiff also filed Objections to this Court’s Order (Dkt. # 159). Plaintiff objected on the

grounds that this Court overlooked evidence that Plaintiff was inarticulate, that he had demonstrated

exceptional circumstances warranting the appointment of counsel, and that this Court lacked

jurisdiction to enter the Order. (Id. at 3-4). On August 27, 2007, District Judge Robert J. Bryan

entered an Order overruling Plaintiff’s objections and affirming this Court’s Order denying

Plaintiff’s motion for counsel. (Dkt. # 162). 

Plaintiff has identified no error in this Court’s Order, nor presented any new facts or legal

authority that suggest reconsideration is appropriate. 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (Dkt. # 156) is DENIED. 

DATED this 4th day of September, 2007.

A

Karen L. Strombom

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05127-RJB Document 165 Filed 09/04/07 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Dated this 8th day of January , 2006

/S/ PETER H. VOELKER 

 Deputy Clerk

MINUTE ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the WESTERN DISTRICT of WASHINGTON

GARY ALAN NOBLE,

 Plaintiff,

)

)

)

vs. )

) C06-579 JLR

SANDRA CARTER,

 Defendant.

)

)

) MINUTE ORDER

) SETTING ORAL ARGUMENT

The following Minute Order is made at the direction of the Court, the Honorable 

James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge:

Upon review of the record, the Court hereby schedules Oral Argument for:

THURSDAY, 18 JANUARY 2007, at 2:30pm

Argument will be heard in Courtroom 12A, U.S. Courthouse, Seattle, Washington. 

Case 2:06-cv-00579-JLR Document 14 Filed 01/08/07 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE SECOND QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          84,371
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,560
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    100,884
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               323,461
<PP&E>                                       3,774,683
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,496,877
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,654,016
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,076,342
<BONDS>                                        868,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       100,035
<OTHER-SE>                                     490,430
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,654,016
<SALES>                                        611,680
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               614,239
<CGS>                                          241,820
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  820,003
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               176,996
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,283
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (409,043)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (382,055)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (409,043)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.04)<F1>
<FN>
<F1>SEE NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED MARCH 31,
1997 - NOTE 3. - LOSS PER COMMON SHARE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
No. 55711.

protests 30038-K and 89507-K (San Francisco).

#### Fung Chong & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

The protests were dismissed.
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 MOTION 

FOR FOURTH EXTENSION - 1

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

DOMINI BOONE,

Plaintiff,

v.

WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF

SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, et al.,

Defendants. 

Case No. C06-857RSL

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR

FOURTH EXTENSION

On July 17, 2006, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause ordering plaintiff Domini

Boone to file an amended complaint within 30 days of the date of the Order or face dismissal. 

Since then, plaintiff requested and the Court granted her three extensions of time to respond. In

its order granting the third request for an extension, the Court stated that “no additional

extensions shall be granted absent a showing of good cause.”

Since then, counsel has entered an appearance on plaintiff’s behalf and has filed a motion

for a fourth extension of time to file an amended complaint. (Dkt. #21). Defendants have not

responded to the motion because they have not yet been served or entered an appearance in this

case. The fact that plaintiff has only recently retained counsel, the apparent complexity of the

issues, and the assistance that counsel will provide all represent good cause for allowing the

extension. Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for an extension is GRANTED. 

Case 2:06-cv-00857-RSL Document 24 Filed 10/31/06 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

ORDER GRANTING MOTION 

FOR FOURTH EXTENSION - 2 -2-

Plaintiff must serve and file her amended complaint by December 4, 2006. No additional

extensions will be granted absent a showing of good cause. 

The Clerk of the Court is directed to renote the Order to Show Cause (Dkt. #4) on the 

Court’s calendar for December 5, 2006.

DATED this 31st day of October, 2006.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00857-RSL Document 24 Filed 10/31/06 Page 2 of 2
# L_2021337EN.01006501.xml

| 23.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 337/65 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 337/65

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE No 245/2018 [2021/1526]

has been withdrawn and therefore left blank

---
Before the Third Division,

March 24, 1959

No. 62879.

#### Browne Vintners Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 127179-K, 127180-K, and 127182-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Motorvehicle use map. Pleasant Grove Ranger District, Uinta-Wasatch-Cache NationalForest, Utah**
 
2015 | 2016| 2018
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28:UI 5/14/
Item Number:0080-G (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000956022
 
July 17, 2018
Case No. 8,849.

#### McKEE v. The PEARL.

[Newb. 129.] 1

District Court, D. Michigan.

1857.2

Collision — Schooner and Steamer — Heave in Stats.

1. A vessel when beating down the river, need not “heave in stays” in meeting a steamboat, but must keep her course.

2. It is the duty of the steamboat to avoid the vessel.

[This cause was taken by appeal to the circuit court, where the decree of this court was reversed. The Pilot, Case No. 11,168.]

[Libel in rem by Frederick McKee, owner of the Pilot, against the Pearl.]

The schooner Pilot was beating down Detroit river in broa'd daylight, when near the head of Bois Blanc island, and close hauled on the starboard track, she was struck on her starboard side by the steamboat Pearl ascending the river, both vessels being near the buoy on the Canada shore.

John S. Newberry, for libelant.

Lothrop & Duffield, for respondent.

2

 [Reversed in Case No. 11,168.]

WILKINS, District Judge.

The steamboat was ascending and the schooner Pilot was beating down the river. The important fact is admitted by the answer, which, according to the principles settled in [St. John v. Paine] 10 How. [51 U. S.] 580, fixes the fault on tlie steamboat. The answer alleges “that the schooner did not go about or heave in stays, but kept on her course.” Being propelled by sails, this was her duty and no fault; and as settled by this court in The Whip and Michigan [Case No. 17,511], the steamboat should have avoided her. The collision occurred in broad daylight, and could have been, and should have been, avoided by the steamboat.

By the proofs submitted, the schooner sustained considerable damage by detention, repairs and injury to cargo, amounting in all, by the estimate furnished, to $205.SI. Decree for that amount.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT SUKHVEER 

SANDHU’S MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL 

MOTIONS DEADLINE & TRIAL DATE - 1 

LAW OFFICES OF STEPHAN R. ILLA, INC. P.S. 

600 FIRST AVENUE, SUITE 433 

SEATTLE, WA 98104 

(206) 464-4142

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

Hon. Ricardo S. Martinez 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE 

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

SUKHVEER SANDHU, 

 Defendant. 

No. CR 06 – 038 RSM 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT 

SUKHVEER SANDHU’S MOTION TO 

CONTINUE PRETRIAL MOTIONS 

DEADLINE & TRIAL DATE 

The Court, having reviewed Defendant Sukhveer Sandhu’s Motion to Continue Pretrial 

Motions Deadline and Trial Date, and the government’s response to the motion, finds that, 

pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B)(iv), the ends of justice 

served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and 

defendant in a speedy trial, for the reasons outlined in defendant’s motion. Specifically, it 

appears to the Court that the failure to grant a trial continuance would effectively deny defense 

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

of due diligence. 

Case 2:06-cr-00038-RSM Document 92 Filed 06/02/06 Page 1 of 2
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT SUKHVEER 

SANDHU’S MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL 

MOTIONS DEADLINE & TRIAL DATE - 2 

LAW OFFICES OF STEPHAN R. ILLA, INC. P.S. 

600 FIRST AVENUE, SUITE 433 

SEATTLE, WA 98104 

(206) 464-4142

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

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the trial date of June 5, 2006 is continued to 

Tuesday, September 5, 2006, and the motions deadline is extended to July 24, 2006, subject to 

defendant filing a Waiver of Speedy Trial. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the period of delay from June 5, 2006 until Tuesday, 

September 5, 2006 is excludable time pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 

3161(h)(8)(A), for the purpose of computing the time limitations imposed by the Speedy Trial 

Act, Title 18 United States Code, Sections 3161 through 3174. 

ORDERED this 2nd day of June, 2006. 

A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Presented by: 

LAW OFFICES OF STEPHAN R. ILLA

Stephan R. Illa 

WSBA No. 15793 

Attorney for Defendant Sukhveer Sandhu 

Case 2:06-cr-00038-RSM Document 92 Filed 06/02/06 Page 2 of 2
# Official Journal C 264A/27 J

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 264A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6627 July 2023 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 264A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6627 July 2023

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2023/C 264 A/01 | Notice of open competition – EPSO/AD/403/23 – Administrators (AD 7) in the following fields: 1. Crisis management; 2. Migration and internal security | 1 |

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2023/C 264 A/01

Notice of open competition – EPSO/AD/403/23 – Administrators (AD 7) in the following fields: 1. Crisis management; 2. Migration and internal security

1

---

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

EN
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 Page 1 ORDER- [C06-5332RJB]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

TIMOTHY R. SANDERS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant

Civil No. C06-5332RJB 

ORDER FOR EXTENSION

OF TIME

Based upon the Stipulation between the parties it is hereby ORDERED that the time for

Defendant to file an answering brief shall be extended to and including November 16, 2006. It is

further ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have to and including November 30, 2006, to file Plaintiff’s

Reply Brief.

DATED this 13th day of November, 2006.

/s/ J. Kelley Arnold 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05332-RJB Document 18 Filed 11/13/06 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 Page 2 ORDER- [C06-5332RJB]

Presented by:

s/ DAVID R. JOHNSON, WSB # 22269

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

Office of the General Counsel

701 Fifth Ave, Ste 2900

Seattle, WA 98104

Phone: (206) 615-2545

Fax: (206)615-2531

david.r.johnson@ssa.gov

Case 3:06-cv-05332-RJB Document 18 Filed 11/13/06 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2  Certification of the Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the periodic report of Knight Capital Corp. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended May 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Dean Sessions, the Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. /s/ Dean SessionsPrincipal Financial Officer Date: August 30, 2010
<PAGE>

Exhibit 10(a)(1)


                           Schedule of Participants
                        In Change-In-Control Agreements


The form of Change-In-Control Agreement was filed as Exhibit 10(d)(3) to the
Registrant's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996
and is incorporated herein by reference. All Change-In-Control Agreements are
identical except for the identity of the participants and dates of execution.

Participants:

Michael F. Biehl
Ronald J. Compiseno
Jeffrey S. Gray
David H. Kelsey
John N. Lauer
Kenneth P. Pavlich
Danny R. Shepherd
Stuart H. Theis
Rochelle F. Walk
|   | (a) | The      report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;  and |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (b) | The      information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      registrant. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

|   | By     | /s/ Ole      Jacob Diesen     |   |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Ole      Jacob Diesen              |   |
|   |   | Chief      Executive Officer  |   |
|   |   | (Principal      Executive Officer) |   |

|   | By     | /s/ Eirik      Ubøe                     |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Eirik      Ubøe                              |   |
|   |   | Chief      Financial Officer                      |   |
|   |   | (Principal      Financial and Accounting Officer) |   |
III

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 93

Designating the week beginning November 23, 1997, and the week beginning

on November 22, 1998, as ‘‘National Family Week’’, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 23, 1997

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

Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Designating the week beginning November 23, 1997, and

the week beginning on November 22, 1998, as ‘‘National

Family Week’’, and for other purposes.

Whereas the family is the basic strength of any free and

orderly society;

Whereas it is appropriate to honor the family unit as essential to the continued well-being of the United States; and

Whereas it is fitting that official recognition be given to the

importance of family loyalties and ties: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate designates the week begin2 ning on November 23, 1997 and the week beginning on

3 November 22, 1998, as ‘‘National Family Week’’. The
2

SRES 93 IS

1 Senate requests the President to issue a proclamation call2 ing on the people of the United States to observe each

3 week with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 31 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

                                                         Calendar No. 9
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 31

Providing for members on the part of the Senate of the Joint Committee 
    on Printing and the Joint Committee of Congress on the Library.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   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

 
Providing for members on the part of the Senate of the Joint Committee 
    on Printing and the Joint Committee of Congress on the Library.

    Resolved, That the following-named Members be, and they are hereby, 
elected members of the following joint committees of Congress:
    Joint Committee on Printing: John Warner; Thad Cochran; Mitch 
McConnell; Wendell H. Ford; and Daniel K. Inouye.
    Joint Committee on the Library of Congress: Ted Stevens; John 
Warner; Thad Cochran; Daniel Patrick Moynihan; and Dianne Feinstein.
                                     

                                                         Calendar No. 9

105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               S. RES. 31

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Providing for members on the part of the Senate of the Joint Committee 
    on Printing and the Joint Committee of Congress on the Library.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            January 28, 1997

                         Placed on the calendar
```