alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 50860.

#### Protests 116094-K, etc., of Norman C. Jensen (Pembina).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that passed upon in *Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(14 Cust. Ct. 94, C. D. 919). In accordance therewith the claim for free entry was sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOHN J. KORESKO, V, et al. : CIVIL ACTION
v. : NO. 04-769
JEFF BLEIWEIS, et al.

Z ORDER
&

AND NOW, this /7 day of December, 2008, it is ORDERED that within ten (10)
days of the date of this Order, Plaintiffs shall show cause why this action should not be dismissed

pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 41.1(a). If Plaintiffs fail to show good cause within

that time, the action will be dismissed with prejudice.’

BY THE COURT:

RUCE W. KAUF

' On October 8, 2008, the Court notified Plaintiffs that no proceeding in this
action had been docketed for a period of over one year and ordered them to file a written
application within thirty days to avoid administrative dismissal of the action. On November 5,
2008, new counsel entered their appearance for Plaintiffs and notified the Court that Plaintiffs
intended to proceed with this action. Based on the representations of Plaintiffs’ new counsel that
they intended to prosecute this matter, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ application pursuant to Local
Rule 41.1(a).

However, on November 18, 2008, Plaintiffs’ new counsel withdrew from the
action. Because the sole ground for the Court’s decision to grant Plaintiffs’ application was the
representation that Plaintiffs had secured new counsel and intended to prosecute this matter, the
Court will require Plaintiffs to show cause why this action should not be dismissed.
Before the Third Division,

February 6, 1946

No. 50878.

#### Protest 53378-K of C. J. Tower & Sons (Buffalo).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of oat scalpings similar in all material respects to those the subject of *James Richardson & Sons*v. *United States*(12 Cust. Ct. 6, C. D. 823), the claim at 5 percent under paragraph 731, as modified by T. D. 49752, was sustained.
null

405.53104
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-12-00478- CR
Ex parte Theodoro Quin ones

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F H AY S CO UNTY, 22ND J UDICIAL DI STRICT NO. CR-12 -01 01- HC, H ONO RAB LE WI LLIAM H ENRY, JUDGE P RESIDING

O R D E R
P ER CURIAM

Appellant filed a n o t i ce o f appea l stating he wished to appea l from the trial court’s interlocutory order s rela ted to his Motion to Reduce Bond. The cler k’s rec ord was filed on J uly 12, 2012, and the repor ter’s rec ord was filed on October 8, 2012. Appellant’s reta ined attorney , W. Paul Parash, made sever al attempts to file a brief elec tronically , but the briefs wer e reje cted beca use they wer e untimely , lacke d a cor rec t motion for ext ension of t ime, and had various errors of form. On December 4, t wo we ek s af ter Mr. Parash’ s last unsucce ssful attempt to file t he brief and a motion for extension of time, we sent him notice that the brief was overdue, reque sting a response by

Dec ember 14. To date, Mr. Paresh has not responde d to our communication, nor ha s he filed a corr ecte d brief a

nd motion for extension of tim e. We there fore order Mr. P ar as h to file a brief and m otion for ex tension of t ime that fully comply with the rules of appellate proce dure an d , i f elec tronically filed, the rules g overning elec tronic filing no later than May 3, 2013. I f appellant has decide d he no longe r wishes to pursuethis appea l, Mr. Parash should file a motion to dismiss no later than May 3, 2013. Fa ilure to comply

with this order will result in Mr. Parash being called befor e this Court to show cause why he should not be held in contempt for violating this order

. I t is ordere d April 23, 2013.

Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton and Rose Do Not Publish

2
# C_2018123EN.01000302.xml

| 9.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 123/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 123/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 February 2018 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-380/16) (1)

1

((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 73 - Taxable amount - Articles 306 to 310 - Special scheme for travel agents - Exclusion from that scheme of sales to taxable undertakings - Overall determination of the taxable amount for a given period - Incompatibility))

(2018/C 123/04)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Owsiany-Hornung and M. Wasmeier, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and R. Kanitz, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M.K. Bulterman, C.S. Schillemans and B. Koopman, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by excluding from the special value-added-tax scheme applicable to travel agents travel services provided to taxable persons who use those services for their business, and by authorising travel agents, in so far as they are subject to that scheme, to determine the taxable amount for value added tax on an overall basis for groups of services or for all services provided during a tax year, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 73 and Articles 306 to 310 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by excluding from the special value-added-tax scheme applicable to travel agents travel services provided to taxable persons who use those services for their business, and by authorising travel agents, in so far as they are subject to that scheme, to determine the taxable amount for value added tax on an overall basis for groups of services or for all services provided during a tax year, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 73 and Articles 306 to 310 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax;

| 2. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 314, 29.8.2016.

1

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL ACTION
v. : NO. 04-269-16
DEREK RUSSELL
ORDER

AND NOW, this 30" day of September 2019, upon considering Derek Russell’s Motion
for reduction of sentence under the First Step Act and Motion for reconsideration (ECF Doc. Nos.
1191, 1198, 1204, 1205), the United States’ Response (ECF Doc. No 1213), Defendant’s Reply
(ECF Doc. No. 1214), following extensive oral argument, and for reasons in the accompanying

Memorandum, it is ORDERED the Motion for reduction or reconsideration of sentence (ECF

LEE

KEARQEY/J.

Doce. Nos. 1191, 1198, 1204, 1205) is DENIED.
file:///J|/INITENG/P14%20cases/P140756.en2.TXT[2/3/2015 11:03:20 AM]

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 14-0756 









file:///J|/INITENG/P14%20cases/P140756.en2.TXT[2/3/2015 11:03:20 AM]

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT 

PMN: 14-0756 


file:///J|/INITENG/P14%20cases/P140756.en2.TXT[2/3/2015 11:03:20 AM]

file:///J|/INITENG/P14%20cases/P140756.en2.TXT[2/3/2015 11:03:20 AM]
IIA

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 127

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

DECEMBER 7 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 22), 2000

Received

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

2001, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Public Law 106–275, is further amended by striking
2

HJ 127 RDS

1 the date specified in section 106(c) and inserting ‘‘Decem2 ber 8, 2000’’.

Passed the House of Representatives December 7,

2000.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
No. 55831.

protest 171386-K (New York).

#### Hudson Shipping Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of bark tanned snake skins the same in all material respects as those passed upon in *Fleming-Joffe, Ltd.*v. *United Stales*(25 Cust. Ct. 56, C. D. 1263), the claim for free ’entry under paragraph 1765 was sustained.
No. 59416.

protest 222443-K (New York).

#### Steinhardter & Nordlinger *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the issue herein is similar in all material respects to that involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351), and that 6 cases out of 325 cases of tuna and bonita, reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty is not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protest was sustained to this extent.
No. 53398.

protests 115472-K, etc. (St. Louis).

#### Fisher Sales Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

: CIVIL ACTION NOS.

:

WYLIE : 02-3872

JACOBS, et al. : 02-3931

MORRIS : 02-3968

VARGAS, et al. : 02-4172

WALSH, et al. : 02-4181

WASLH, et al. : 02-4183

BRUNO : 02-4232

BURNETT, et al. : 02-4236

ANCTIL : 02-4285

FISHER, et al. : 02-4293

ASHCRAFT : 02-4297

CHARBONEAU : 02-4308

:

VS. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION, et al. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of July, 2002, the Court having been previously

advised that the above action cannot proceed to trial and disposition because of the following

reason:

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending disposition of a related

action.

[ ] - Order staying these proceedings pending determination of

arbitration proceedings.

[ ] - Interlocutory appeal filed.

[ X ] - Other: Case is placed into suspense pending receipt of the Case

Transfer Order from the Judicial Panel on Multi District Litigation

transferring case to District of Minnesota..

It is

ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mark this action closed for statistical purposes and

place the matter in the Civil Suspense File, and it is

Case 2:02-cv-04172-LDD Document 2 Filed 07/15/2002 Page 1 of 2
FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall retain jurisdiction; and that the case be

restored to the trial docket when the action is in a status so that it may proceed to final

disposition; this order shall not prejudice the rights of the parties to this litigation.

BY THE COURT:

________________________________________

Legrome D. Davis, Judge

Case 2:02-cv-04172-LDD Document 2 Filed 07/15/2002 Page 2 of 2
ORIGINAL 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTA 

PR 24-0006 

IN RE MOTION FOR ADMISSION UPON UNIFORM 

BAR EXAMINATION SCORE TRANSFER 

JUN 1 1 2024 

Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of Montana 

ORDER 

Lauren M. Ayoub has filed a petition for admission to the State Bar of Montana 

pursuant to Rule IV of the Rules for Admission to the Bar of the State of Montana, 

governing admission upon Uniform Bar Examination score transfer. The Bar Admissions 

Administrator of the State Bar of Montana has informed the Court that the Commission on 

Character and Fitness has certified that Ayoub has provided the necessary documentation 

and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to admission under Rule IV of the Rules for 

Admission to the State Bar of Montana. Therefore, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and 

competition of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Adrnissions 

Administrator, Lauren M. Ayoub may be sworn in to the practice of law in the State of 

Montana. 

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to the Petitioner and the State 

Bar of Montana. 

DATED this t day of June, 2024. 

Chief Justice 

("t6-faytt,,, 

06/11/2024

Case Number: PR 24-0006
747-0-4-k-
Case 2:03-cv-04822-RBS     Document 66-13      Filed 08/14/2009     Page 1 of 1
-  Bureau of Fiscal Service 
- Debt Management
- Legal-Authorities
- Executive Orders

# Executive Orders

## Executive Order 13019

- Supporting Families: Collecting Delinquent Child Support Obligations
- The  Debt Collection Improvement Act  of 1996 was enacted into law on April 26, 1996. It authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to collect past-due child support by the administrative offset of federal payments. Executive Order 13019 of September 1996, requires the Secretary of the Treasury to promptly develop and implement procedures necessary for the collection of past-due child support debts by administrative offset.
- Download PDF  |                         Download Text
- Memorandum from the Attorney General
- Pertaining to Executive Order 13019: Minimum Due Process Guidelines for Agencies to Deny Federal Financial Assistance.

Last modified 07/14/23
Order entered January 10 , 2020

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 01106
- CV
IN THE INTEREST OF J .C.F. AND R.J.F., CH ILDREN On Appeal from the 255th Judicial Distric t Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF
- 19
- 00453



### O RDER The reporter’s record in this case has not been filed. By letter dated November 8, 2019, we informed appellant the court reporter notified us that the reporter’s record had not been fi led because appellant had not (1) requested the record; or (2) paid for or made arrangements to pay for the record. We directed appellant to provide the Court with written verification showing the reporter’s record had been requested and that appellant ha d paid for or made arrangements to pay for the record or had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that failure to provide the required documentation within ten days might result in the appeal being ordered submit ted without the reporter’s record. To date, appellant has not provided the required documentation nor otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of the reporter’s record. Accordingly, we ORDER this appeal submitted without a reporter’s re cord.Appellant’s brief is due THIRTY DAYS from the date of this order.

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE
Case 2:04-cv-02627-HB Document 83 Filed 11/18/2005 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:04-cv-02627-HB Document 83 Filed 11/18/2005 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:04-cv-02627-HB Document 83 Filed 11/18/2005 Page 3 of 3
# C_2015262EN.01003402.xml

| 10.8.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 262/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.8.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 262/34

---

Action brought on 5 June 2015 — OASE/OHIM — COMPO France (AlGo)

(Case T-300/15)

(2015/C 262/46)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: OASE GmbH (Hörstel, Germany) (represented by: T. Weeg, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: COMPO France SAS (Roche-Lez-Beaupré, France)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant: OASE GmbH

Applicant:

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘AlGo’ — Registration No 10 096 337

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 February 2015 in Case R 1409/2013-1

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | amend the contested decision by declaring that the opposition is rejected in its entirety; |
| --- | --- |

—

amend the contested decision by declaring that the opposition is rejected in its entirety;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CLINT TRACY and

KARYN TRACY

:

:

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4115

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04115-BWK Document 7 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
# Directions

# Example

# Spreadsheet
(Reap. Dec. 10321)

Entry Nos. 15692; 432.

#### Kurt Orban Co., Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided August 29, 1962)

*Sharretts, Paley é Carter*for the plaintiff.

*Joseph*Z>. *G-uilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Olivee, Chief Judge:

These two appeals for reappraisement are before me for decision on a written stipulation of submission, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED hy and between counsel for the parties hereto that the merchandise consists of wire rods exported from Japan after April 17,1961, and prior to July 1,1961.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the merchandise is not on the final lists of products (T.D. 54521) from which the operation of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 was withheld.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the price, at the time of exportation to the United States of the merchandise undergoing appraisement, at which such or similar merchandise is freely sold or, in the absence of sales offered for sale in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was $520 per metric ton, net packed.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that these appeals he submitted on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the wire rods in question is statutory export value and hold that such value for the present merchandise is $520 per metric ton, net, packed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
No. 60747.

#### Landis & Gyr, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 277341-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

There being nothing before the court tending in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the classification by the collector, the protest was overruled.
# C_2015398EN.01007601.xml

| 30.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/76 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/76

---

Action brought on 14 October 2015 — Metabolic Balance Holding GmbH v OHIM (Metabolic Balance)

(Case T-594/15)

(2015/C 398/88)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Metabolic Balance Holding GmbH (Isen, Germany) (represented by: W. Riegger, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Defendant:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Trade mark at issue: Community figurative mark containing the word element ‘Metabolic Balance’ — Application for registration No 1 2 5 86  137

Trade mark at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 12 August in Case R 2156/2014-1

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs, including those of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs, including those of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
EXHIBIT 23.1


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS'


Board of Directors and Shareholders
World Gaming Plc and Subsidiaries

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (SEC File No. 333-70056) of World Gaming Plc of our audit
report dated March 25, 2004, which is part of and relates to the consolidated
financial statements contained in this Form 20-F, and all references to our firm
included in this Form 20-F.


/s/ HJ & Associates, LLC
HJ & Associates, LLC
Salt Lake City, Utah
April 2, 2004