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

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 72 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 72

  To allow disabled persons or Senate employees seeking access to the 
    Senate floor the ability to bring what supporting services are 
          necessary for them to execute their official duties.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 15, 1997

    Mr. Lott (for himself, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Reid, Mr. Wellstone, Mr. 
Murkowski, and Mr. Bryan) submitted the following resolution; which was 
         referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  To allow disabled persons or Senate employees seeking access to the 
    Senate floor the ability to bring what supporting services are 
          necessary for them to execute their official duties.

    Resolved, That an individual with a disability who has or is 
granted the privilege of the Senate floor may bring such supporting 
services on the Senate floor, which the Senate Sergeant At Arms 
determines are necessary and appropriate to assist such disabled 
individuals in discharging the official duties of his or her position 
until the Committee on Rules and Administration has the opportunity to 
fully consider a permanent rules change.
                                 <all>
```
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

EDWARD L. PRICE,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant.

CASE NO. C06-5378FDB-KLS

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's complaint, the Report and Recommendation of Judge Karen

L. Strombom, United States Magistrate Judge, and objections to the report and recommendation, if any,

and the remaining record, does hereby find and ORDER:

(1) the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) the ALJ erred in his decision as described in the report;

(3) the matter is therefore REVERSED and remanded to the Commissioner for further

administrative proceedings; and

(4) the Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to plaintiff's counsel, defendant’s counsel

and Magistrate Judge Karen L. Strombom.

DATED this 22nd day of February 2007.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05378-FDB Document 18 Filed 02/22/07 Page 1 of 1
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

WILLIAM FINN III and CINDY FINN,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHN S. PETERSON, attorney at law,

MICHAEL D. BOHANNON, attorney at law,

separately/jointly responsible,

Defendants.

Case No. MS06-5015FDB

ORDER DENYING IFP AND

DISMISSING CAUSE OF ACTION 

Plaintiff applies to proceed in forma pauperis in this cause of action, “Criminal Complaint and

Notice of Felony and Request for Presentment of Facts in Front of A Federal Grand Jury For

Indictment as Per 18 USC, Part.1, Chapter 1, Par. 4 Under Misprision of Felony.” Plaintiffs have

assets sufficient to render it reasonable to require them to pay the filing fee in this matter. 

Plaintiffs’ case has been docketed as a miscellaneous matter, but it does not appear

appropriate for this matter to proceed as such, if at all. Plaintiffs appear to complain about not being

allowed by the Bankruptcy Court to withdraw from voluntary bankruptcy and they also assert that

the attorney defendants are illegally attempting to interfere with the Dutchess Trust as an alter ego of

Case 3:06-mc-05015-FDB Document 2 Filed 07/17/06 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 - 2

William Finn III and Cindy Finn. An individual may not independently file criminal charges, and

Plaintiffs’ concerns are matters that are more appropriately brought before the Bankruptcy Court. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED: 

1. Plaintiffs’ Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis is DENIED; 

2. Plaintiffs’ cause of action is DISMISSED. 

DATED this 17th day of July, 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-mc-05015-FDB Document 2 Filed 07/17/06 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 61 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.61
                                     Agreed to November 12, 1997        

                       One Hundred Fifth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
 the seventh day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-seven

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That (a) a revised edition of the publication entitled ``Our Flag'', 
revised under the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing, shall 
be reprinted as a Senate document.
    (b) There shall be printed--
        (1)(A) 250,000 copies of the publication for the use of the 
    House of Representatives, distributed in equal numbers to each 
    Member;
        (B) 51,500 copies of the publication for the use of the Senate, 
    distributed in equal numbers to each Member;
        (C) 2,000 copies of the publication for the use of the Joint 
    Committee on Printing; and
        (D) 1,400 copies of the publication for distribution to the 
    depository libraries; or
        (2) if the total printing and production costs of copies in 
    paragraph (1) exceed $150,000, such number of copies of the 
    publication as does not exceed total printing and production costs 
    of $150,000, with distribution to be allocated in the same 
    proportion as in paragraph (1).
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
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

DARRELL JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

CAROL PORTER et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-5342RBL

REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION TO

DISMISS COMPLAINT

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

NOTED FOR:

March 9, 2007

This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(B). This matter comes before the court upon plaintiff's request/motion to voluntarily dismiss his

complaint, (Dkt. # 18). The court entered an order to amend the complaint and despite a number of

extensions of time, plaintiff has failed to do so. On January 17, 2007, plaintiff sought yet another extension

of time, That motion has been denied. Plaintiff asks, in the alternative, that he be allowed to withdraw his

complaint (Dkt. # 18). The Court recommends the action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

DISCUSSION

Under Rule 41, a plaintiff has the right to voluntarily dismiss his case when no answer or motion for

summary judgment has been filed by an adverse party. Rule 41(a)(1) specifically provides that dismissal as a

matter of right can be foreclosed only by the filing of an answer or a motion for summary judgment. Roddy v.

Dendy, 141 F.R.D. 261, 262 (S.D. Mississippi, 1992). When ruling on a motion to dismiss without prejudice,

Case 3:06-cv-05342-RBL Document 20 Filed 02/09/07 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

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Page - 2

the district court must determine whether the defendant will suffer some plain, legal prejudice as a result of the

dismissal. Hyde & Drath v. Baker, 24 F.3d 1162, 1169 (9th Cir.1994); Hamilton v. Firestone Tire & Rubber

Co., 679 F.2d 143, 145 (9th Cir.1982).

Here, the complaint has not been served. Thus, plaintiff has a right to dismiss the action. 

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, plaintiff's request to voluntarily dismiss his complaint (Dkt. # 18) should be GRANTED. 

A proposed order accompanies this report and recommendation.

Dated this 9 day of February, 2007.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05342-RBL Document 20 Filed 02/09/07 Page 2 of 2
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-2053

___________________________

Leon Henry Carter, III

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Ralph Clark; Plastech Industries; Plastech Corporation

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis

____________

 Submitted: December 14, 2015

Filed: December 15, 2015

[Unpublished] 

____________

Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
Leon Carter appeals the district court’s dismissal of his action as barred by 1

collateral estoppel and res judicata. Upon careful review, we conclude that the

dismissal was proper. See Nolles v. State Comm. for Reorg. of Sch. Dists., 524 F.3d

892, 901 (8th Cir. 2008) (res judicata effect of first forum’s judgment is governed by

first forum’s law; de novo standard of review); see also Hauschildt v. Beckingham,

686 N.W.2d 829, 840 (Minn. 2004) (standard for applying res judicata; doctrine

applies not only to every matter which was actually litigated, but also to every matter

which might have been litigated).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

The Honorable Michael J. Davis, then-Chief Judge, United States District 1

Court for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendation of the

Honorable Leo I. Brisbois, United States Magistrate Judge of the District of

Minnesota. 

-2-
September 2012

A healthy, fully 

functioning soil is 

balanced to provide 

an environment 

that sustains and 

nourishes plants, 

soil microbes and 

beneficial insects. 

Soil is a living system, and healthy 

soil should look, smell, and feel alive. 

Healthy soil can increase production, increase 

profits, and protect natural resources, such as 

air and water. Dig in to your soil to discover 

what your soil can tell you about its health and 

production potential.

Dig in and see

Healthy soil is darker in color, crumbly, 

and porous. It is home to worms and other 

organisms that squirm, creep, hop, or crawl. 

Healthy soil provides the right amount of air, 

water, and organic matter for microorganisms 

to thrive and for plants to grow. Soil that is 

functioning at its full potential is full of the 

roots of the healthy and strong plants it 

supports.

dig a little

learn a lot

unlock your farm’s potential
An unhealthy, poorly functioning soil appears 

lighter in color, is compacted or has poor 

structure, and contains limited roots and living 

things. 

Dig in and smell

Healthy soil has a sweet and earthy aroma. This 

is the scent of geosmin, a byproduct of soil 

microbes called actinomycetes. These microbes 

decompose the tough plant and animal 

residues in and on the soil and bring nitrogen 

from the air into the soil to feed plants.

An unhealthy, out-of-balance soil smells sour or 

metallic, or like kitchen cleanser. 

Dig in and feel

Healthy soil is easy to dig into. It is soft, moist, 

and crumbly, and allows plants to grow their 

roots more freely and unimpeded. This crumbly 

or granular structure is ideal because porous, 

healthy soil holds water for plants to use 

when they need it. Its increased water-holding 

capacity reduces runoff that can cause flooding, 

and increases the availability of water to plants 

during droughts.

An unhealthy, poorly functioning soil feels dry, 

crusty, and cloddy and does not crumble readily 

when pulled apart. 

Dig a Little. Learn a Lot.

Understanding how healthy soils look, smell, 

and feel are the first steps towards achieving 

soil health. Dig a little! If you find soil that is out 

of balance, NRCS can offer management tips to 

improve soil health.

Soil Health Management 

Systems

Implementing Soil Health Management Systems 

can lead to increased organic matter, more soil 

organisms, reduced soil compaction and improved 

nutrient storage and cycling. As an added bonus, 

fully functioning, healthy soils absorb and retain 

more water, making them less susceptible to 

runoff and erosion. This means more water will be 

available for crops when they need it. Soil Health 

Management Systems allow farmers to enjoy profits 

because they spend less on fuel and energy while 

benefiting from the higher crop yields resulting 

from improved soil conditions.

Contact your local NRCS office to learn more about 

Soil Health Management Systems and the technical 

and financial assistance available to help “Unlock 

the Secrets in the Soil.”

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Exhibit 11.7

CONSENT OF EXPERT



To:

Baja Mining Corp., (the Company)



I, P.L. Hellman, FAIG, PhD., MAusIMM, PhD., do hereby consent to the filing of the written disclosure of the technical report titled, Baja Mining Corp.  A Preliminary Assessment of the El Boleo Copper Cobalt Project, of the El Boleo Project located in Santa Rosalia, Baja California Sur, Mexico and dated August 12, 2005 (the Technical Report) and any extracts from or a summary of the Technical Report in the Registration Statement on Form 20-F dated, July 6, 2006 (the Registration) of the Company, and to the filing of the Technical Report with United States Securities and Exchange Commission.



I also consent to the use of my name in the Registration Statement.



Dated this 6th day of July, 2006.

[consentofexpertphilhellma002.gif]











I, P.L. Hellman, FAIG, PhD., MAusIMM, PhD., do hereby consent to the filing of the written disclosure of the technical report titled, Resource Estimate Study  The El Boleo Copper Cobalt Zinc Deposit, Baja California Sur, Mexico, of the El Boleo Project located in Santa Rosalia, Baja California Sur, Mexico and dated March 2005 (the Technical Report) and any extracts from or a summary of the Technical Report in the Registration Statement on Form 20-F dated, July 6, 2006 (the Registration) of the Company, and to the filing of the Technical Report with United States Securities and Exchange Commission.



I also consent to the use of my name in the Registration Statement.



Dated this 6th day of July, 2006.



[consentofexpertphilhellma004.gif]
Order entered February 14, 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 21

- 00684

- CR

STEPHANIE ANNE TIMINEY , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 001

- 84907

- 2020

O RDER

Before the Court is appellant’s second motion for an exte nsion of time to file

her brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellan t ’ s brief due by March 14,

2022.

/s / LANA MYERS JUSTICE
III

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 300

Electing James W. Ziglar, of Mississippi, as the Sergeant at Arms and

Doorkeeper of the Senate.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 15 (legislative day, OCTOBER 2), 1998

Mr. LOTT submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed

to

RESOLUTION

Electing James W. Ziglar, of Mississippi, as the Sergeant

at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.

1 Resolved, That James W. Ziglar, of Mississippi, be,

2 and he is hereby, elected Sergeant at Arms and Door3 keeper of the Senate effective November 9, 1998.

Æ
# Official Journal C 315/2021

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 315 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 646 August 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 315

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 646 August 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| 2021/C 315/01 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency for the financial year 2021 | 1 |
| 2021/C 315/02 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1 | 6 |
| 2021/C 315/03 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1 | 11 |
| 2021/C 315/04 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1 | 18 |
| 2021/C 315/05 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1 | 23 |
| 2021/C 315/06 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1 | 28 |
| 2021/C 315/07 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1 | 33 |
| 2021/C 315/08 | Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for the Space Programme for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 2 | 38 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

2021/C 315/01

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency for the financial year 2021

1

2021/C 315/02

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1

6

2021/C 315/03

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1

11

2021/C 315/04

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Education and Culture Executive Agency for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1

18

2021/C 315/05

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1

23

2021/C 315/06

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1

28

2021/C 315/07

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Health and Digital Executive Agency for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 1

33

2021/C 315/08

Statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for the Space Programme for the financial year 2021 – amending budget No 2

38

---

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

EN
Order entered November 29, 2012

In The

Ji[t! i tri t a[ at aita 

No. 05-12-01580-CV

MICHAEL LODISPOTO, Appellant

V.

ADI RUVOLO, Appellee

On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-03660-2012

ORDER

The Court has before it appellant’s November 21, 2012 motion for temporary relief and

appellee’s November 27, 2012 response to that motion. Neither party has requested enforcement

of the temporary injunction from this Court. See TEX. R. App. P. 29.4. We therefore GRANT

the motion and STAY the November 30, 2012 hearing In the trial court on appellee’s motion for

contempt, motion for order to show cause, and motion for sanctions. This stay shall remain in

effect until further order of this Court.

DAVID L.

JUSTICE
No. 65259.

#### Geo. Borgfeldt Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 58/17541, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 C.C.P.A. 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DETENTION ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W. D. OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

ROBERT L CREWS,

 Defendant.

Case No. CR06-5008

 CR06-5413

DETENTION ORDER

THE COURT, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3142, finds that no condition or combination

of conditions which defendant can meet will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and/or the safety of any

other person and the community.

This finding is based on 1) the nature and circumstances of the offense(s) charged, including whether the offense is a

crime of violence or involves a narcotic drug; 2) the weight of the evidence against the person; 3) the history and characteristics of

the person including those set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(3)(A)(B); and 4) the nature and seriousness of the danger release would

impose to any person or the community.

Findings of Fact/ Statement of Reasons for Detention

Presumptive Reasons/Unrebutted:

 ( ) Conviction of a Federal offense involving a crime of violence. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(A)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(B)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of 10+ years as prescribed in the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.§801 et seq.), the

Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C.§951 et seq.) Or the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (46

U.S.C. App. 1901 et seq.)

 ( ) Convictions of two or more offenses described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(1) of two or more

State or local offenses that would have been offenses described in said subparagraphs if a circumstance giving rise to

Federal jurisdiction had existed, or a combination of such offenses.

Safety Reasons:

 (X) Defendant is currently on probation/supervision resulting from a prior offense.

 ( ) Defendant was on bond on other charges at time of alleged occurrences herein.

 (X) Defendant’s prior criminal history.

 (X) History of failure to comply with Court orders.

Flight Risk/Appearance Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant’s lack of sufficient ties to the community.

 ( ) Immigration and Naturalization Service detainer.

 ( ) Detainer(s)/Warrant(s) from other jurisdictions.

 (X) Failures to appear for past court proceedings.

 ( ) Past conviction for escape.

 

Order of Detention

< The defendant shall be committed to the custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility

separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal.

< The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel.

< The defendant shall on order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, be delivered

to a United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding.

 October 16, 2006.

__s/ Karen L. Strombom________________

Karen L Strombom, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cr-05413-JKA Document 10 Filed 10/16/06 Page 1 of 1