alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MERRICK JOSE MOORE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0871 MCE EFB P

vs.

J. SLOSS, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER & WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

 / AD TESTIFICANDUM

A. McCoy, inmate # D-61772, a necessary and material witness in proceedings in

this case on March 22, 2010, is confined in the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility,

Corcoran, California, in the custody of the Warden; in order to secure this inmate's attendance it

is necessary that a Writ of Habeas Corpus ad Testificandum issue commanding the custodian to

produce the inmate in Court, 14th Floor, Courtroom 7, United States Courthouse, 501 I Street,

Sacramento, California on March 22, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. 

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. A Writ of Habeas Corpus ad Testificandum issue, under the seal of this court,

commanding the Warden to produce the inmate named above to testify in United States District

Court at the time and place above, and from day to day until completion of court proceedings or

as ordered by the court; and thereafter to return the inmate to the above institution; 

2. The custodian is ordered to notify the court of any change in custody of this

inmate and is ordered to provide the new custodian with a copy of this writ; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a courtesy copy of this order and

writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum on the Out-To-Court Desk, California State Prison -

Sacramento, P.O. Box 290007, Represa, California 95671.

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AD TESTIFICANDUM

To: Warden Ken Clark, California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility, 900 Quebec

Avenue, P.O. Box 7100, Corcoran, California 93212:

WE COMMAND you to produce the inmate named above to testify before the

United States District Court at the time and place above, and from day to day until completion of

the proceedings or as ordered by the court; and thereafter to return the inmate to the above

institution.

FURTHER, you have been ordered to notify the court of any change in custody

of the inmate and have been ordered to provide the new custodian with a copy of this writ.

DATED: February 17, 2010.

Case 2:04-cv-00871-MCE -EFB Document 135 Filed 02/17/10 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3956 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3956

To include phosphate and potash on the final list of critical minerals 
                   of the Department of the Interior.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 14, 2024

  Mr. Tillis (for himself, Mr. Brown, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Ricketts, Mr. 
Scott of Florida, and Ms. Baldwin) introduced the following bill; which 
  was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
                               Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To include phosphate and potash on the final list of critical minerals 
                   of the Department of the Interior.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. INCLUSION OF PHOSPHATE AND POTASH AS CRITICAL MINERALS.

    (a) In General.--The list of critical minerals published in the 
notice of the Secretary of the Interior entitled ``2022 Final List of 
Critical Minerals'' (87 Fed. Reg. 10381 (February 24, 2022)) shall be 
deemed to include phosphate and potash.
    (b) Recommendations.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
enactment of this section, the Secretary of the Interior shall evaluate 
current policies relating to permitting and leasing of projects to 
develop the minerals described in subsection (a) and submit to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the 
Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives 
recommendations to support domestic production of those minerals.
                                 <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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARREL LEE SMITH,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0703 MCE KJM P

vs.

SERGEANT J. SWANEY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action

filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. By order filed May 18, 2005, plaintiff was ordered to file a fourth

amended complaint. Plaintiff filed his fourth amended complaint on May 27, 2005.

The court is required to screen complaints brought by prisoners seeking relief

against a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity. 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915A(a). The court must dismiss a complaint or portion thereof if the prisoner has raised

claims that are legally “frivolous or malicious,” that fail to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted, or that seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief. 28

U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1),(2). 

While it is not entirely clear, plaintiff appears to challenge prison disciplinary

proceedings that resulted in plaintiff being placed in administrative segregation, losing his prison

Case 2:04-cv-00703-MCE -KJM Document 20 Filed 04/05/06 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

1

 The exhaustion of state court remedies is a prerequisite to the granting of a petition for

writ of habeas corpus. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). 

2

job and losing thirty days of good conduct sentence credit. Based on some of the information

contained in the attachments to the fourth amended complaint, it appears plaintiff’s sentence

credit may have been restored. However, if his credit has not been restored he may not proceed

with an action for violation of civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This is because when a state

prisoner challenges the legality of his custody and the relief he seeks is the determination of his

entitlement to an earlier release, his sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus. Preiser v.

Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 500 (1973). 

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff inform the court

within twenty days whether the sentence credit taken away as a result of the prison disciplinary

proceeding at issue in this matter has been restored. If the credit was not restored, plaintiff shall

inform the court whether he has exhausted state court remedies with respect to his challenge to

the prison disciplinary proceeding.1 Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order will result in a

recommendation that this action be dismissed.

DATED: April 4, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1

smit0703.dis(5.27.05)

Case 2:04-cv-00703-MCE -KJM Document 20 Filed 04/05/06 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

1 In his declaration, counsel for defendant explains that the

bill of costs includes the costs for a video and transcript from

three sessions of plaintiff’s deposition. The transcripts total

$1831.50 and the videos total $1751.50. Defendant’s bill of cost

also includes $25.00 to obtain plaintiff’s medical records. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GLORIA SALTER,

NO. CIV. S-04-29 LKK/DAD

Plaintiffs,

v. O R D E R

ANTHONY J. PRINCIPI; and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERAN’S 

AFFAIRS,

Defendants.

 /

This matter comes before the court on defendant’s bill of

costs. Defendant seeks $3608.00 in costs.1 Plaintiff is directed

to file objections, if any, within ten days of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 13, 2005.

/s/Lawrence K. Karlton 

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:04-cv-00029-LKK -DAD Document 34 Filed 09/14/05 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 26-3 Filed 05/12/2006 Page 1 of 2

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 26 Att. 2

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 26-3 Filed 05/12/2006 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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VANCE EDWARD JOHNSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

D.L. RUNNELS, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:04-cv-776-TLN-EFB P

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 

On July 30, 2013, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 

were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 

findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. After an extension of time, 

plaintiff has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 

file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 

proper analysis.

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00776-TLN-EFB Document 254 Filed 12/13/13 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed July 30, 2013, are adopted in full.

2. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants Pribble, Wilbur, Kelsey, Briddle, St. Andre,

Weaver, Gower, Bates, Brown, and Arnold are dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies.

3. Plaintiff’s claim alleging that defendant Von Rader subjected him to excessive force

on December 31, 2002 is dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative

remedies.

4. Plaintiff’s claim alleging that defendant Houghland punched, grabbed, and slammed

plaintiff against a wall on December 31, 2002 is dismissed without prejudice for failure to

exhaust administrative remedies.

5. Plaintiff’s claim alleging that defendant Chapman “was a bystander in tacit

authorization and refused to intervene” as other defendants punched, grabbed, and slammed

plaintiff into a wall on December 31, 2002 is dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust

administrative remedies.

6. Summary adjudication of plaintiff’s claims that defendants Bigford, Martinez, Little,

and Doyle deprived plaintiff of warm food, yard exercise, phone calls, paper, pen, request slips,

complaint forms, and medical care between December 31, 2002 and January 9, 2003 is granted

in favor of defendants. 

7. Summary adjudication of plaintiff’s claims for compensatory damages against 

defendants Bigford, Martinez, Little, and Doyle is granted in favor of defendants.

8. Summary adjudication of plaintiff’s claims against defendant Hicks is granted in her

favor.

9. Defendants’ requests for summary adjudication and/or dismissal of plaintiff’s

remaining claims are denied.

So ordered.

Dated: December 11, 2013

Case 2:04-cv-00776-TLN-EFB Document 254 Filed 12/13/13 Page 2 of 2
No. 51668.

#### Protests 931804-G, etc., of B. F. Montague Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that certain items of the merchandise consist of cotton gloves similar in all material respects to those passed upon in *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333) and that other items of the merchandise consist of knit cotton fabric the same as the fabric of which the gloves the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co., supra,*were made. In accordance therewith the claims at 50 percent under paragraph 915 and 35 percent under paragraph 914, plus additional duty under paragraph 924, were sustained.
**Part 2, Section V: USSGL Crosswalks to Standard External Reports**

This section includes crosswalks for use in Fiscal Year 2020 GTAS Reporting. These crosswalks map USSGL accounts to external reports in accordance with current reporting guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB), and the Bureau of the Fiscal Service (Fiscal Service).

Each report crosswalk lists the proper USSGL accounts and applicable attributes for each line and/or column on the reports. Attributes identify information subsidiary to the basic 6-digit USSGL accounts. This subsidiary information is necessary to meet external reporting requirements. See Section IV for additional information on attributes.

All crosswalks require pre-closing USSGL account balances.

The following are crosswalks from the USSGL Chart of Accounts to standard external reports required by OMB and Fiscal Service:

Page 1 of 1

# image1.png
No. 55214.

#### Wilbur-Ellis Company *v.*United States,

protest 167246-K (A) (New York).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protest was dismissed.
1

From:

Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 1:59 AM

To: RedHill

Subject: Protect our Water from Jet Fuel

Follow Up Flag: Follow up

Flag Status: Flagged

I am writing to express my extreme concern for the quality of our drinking water threatened by the jet fuel leaking from

Navy storage tanks in Red Hill.  

Please ensure this jet fuel is completely cleaned up immediately. Twenty‐five years is too long. If the leaks cannot be

immediately fixed, then the tanks must be emptied.  

I also ask that the public comment period on the negotiated agreement between the U.S. Navy, Environmental

Protection Agency, and Hawaii Department of Health be extended to allow the public meaningful opportunity to

understand and weigh‐in on this important issue.  

Please continue to keep me informed in this decision‐making process.  

Thank you.
Part 1

Supplement

USSGL Crosswalk - Reclassified Statement of Operations and Changes in Net Position

Fiscal Year 2018 Reporting

Section V

IRC Meeting 9/25/2018

Line

No.

USSGL

Acct. USSGL Account Title Begin/End Fed/NonFed Exch/Nonexch Budgetary Impact Indicator Reporting Type Code Recip. Cat. Addl. Info.

8.4 44

8.4 599000 Collections for Others - Statement of Custodial Activity E G E/T E E/U 6

Non-entity collections transferred to the General Fund of the U.S. 

Government (RC 44)
Footnotes and Additional Information

1. For Reciprocal Category (RC) detail information, see TFM Volume 1, Part 2, Chapter 4700, Agency Reporting 

Requirements for the Financial Report of the United States Government, Appendix 7.

2. As defined in TFM, Volume I, Part 2, Chapter 4700, Agency Reporting Requirements for the Financial Report of 

the United States Government.

3. Seigniorage is defined as "Other Financing Sources" (see SFFAS No. 7, paragraph 305) and has a non-Federal 

attribute. A new line to accommodate seigniorage with an "N" attribute was not added to the "Other Financing 

Sources" line since seigniorage does not meet the Financial Report's materiality threshold. As a result, seigniorage 

was added to the "Other Taxes and Receipts" line instead.

4. Exclude General Fund of the U.S. Government activity in this account.

5. Budgetary portion only.

6. Non budgetary portion only.

7. This line now includes amounts previously captured in lines 7.10 and 7.11. If a new RC is established then the 

data can be segregated.

8. This line now includes amounts previously captured in lines 8.4 and 8.5. If a new RC is established then the data 

can be segregated.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-60313

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WOODROW BEAMER,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:94CV043D

- - - - - - - - - -

June 25, 1996

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

 Woodrow Beamer appeals from an order dismissing his motion

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He argues that his convictions for

using and carrying a firearm during a drug trafficking offense

and possession with intent to distribute cocaine base violated

the Double Jeopardy Clause. We AFFIRM the district court's

dismissal of this claim for essentially the same reasons set
No. 95-60313

-2-

forth by the district court. United States v. Beamer, No.

3:94CV043D (N.D. Miss. March 9, 1995).

 We do not consider Beamer's new claim on appeal that the

evidence was insufficient to show an active employment of the

firearm. See United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64

(5th Cir. 1994) (en banc) (citing United States v. Olano, 507

U.S. 725, 731-37 (1993)), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 1266 (1995). 

Further, Beamer's claim that his sentence constituted racial

discrimination is deemed abandoned. See Brinkmann v. Dallas

County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

 The appeal is without arguable merit and thus frivolous. 

See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). 

Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. 5th Cir.

R. 42.2.

 APPEAL 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 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

BENITO JULIAN LUNA, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

SCOTT KERNAN, 

Respondent. 

No. 2:04-cv-0627 MCE GGH P 

ORDER 

 Petitioner is a state prisoner represented by counsel, proceeding with an application for a 

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 29, 2015, the Ninth Circuit Court 

of Appeals vacated the district court’s judgment dismissing the petition as untimely, and 

remanded “for the district court to determine in the first instance, after conducting an evidentiary 

hearing if necessary, whether Luna diligently pursued his rights through the date of filing, June 3, 

2011.” The court stated that the district court’s determination would control whether the petition 

should be deemed timely. (ECF No. 61.) On July 30, 2015, the mandate issued. 

 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: within twenty-one days of this order, petitioner shall 

submit documentation in support of a request to expand the record, and/or request an evidentiary 

hearing. 

Dated: August 6, 2015 

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 2:04-cv-00627-MCE-GGH Document 63 Filed 08/07/15 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 21

Jostens, Inc. and subsidiaries as of March 1, 2001.

Name of Company                                Jurisdiction of Incorporation
---------------                                -----------------------------

Jostens Canada, Ltd.                           Canada
Jostens Can Investments B.V.                   The Netherlands
Jostens International Holdings B.V.            The Netherlands
C.V. Jostens Global Trading                    The Netherlands
JC Trading, Inc.                               Puerto Rico
Conceptos Jostens, S.A. de C.V.                Mexico
Reconocimientos E Incentivos, S.A. de C.V.     Mexico
No. 58941.

protests 244711-K and 244712-K (New York).

#### W. R. Grace & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

From an examination of the papers in these cases, the court was unable to find anything to overcome the presumption of correctness of the collector’s classification. The protests were therefore overruled.
EPA-420-R-10-007

February 2010

Assessment and Standards Division

Office of Transportation and Air Quality

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Prepared for EPA by

ICF International

and

T&B Systems

EPA Contract No. EP-C-06-094

Work Assignment No. 3-6

Development and Evaluation of an Air 

Quality Modeling Approach for Lead 

Emissions from Piston-Engine Aircraft 

Operating on Leaded Aviation Gasoline

Appendix D

Summer 2009 Model-to-Monitor Results

NOTICE

This technical report does not necessarily represent final EPA decisions or 

positions. It is intended to present technical analysis of issues using data 

that are currently available. The purpose in the release of such reports is to 

facilitate the exchange of technical information and to inform the public of 

technical developments.
ii 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
East Tarmac 26th

0

20406080

100120140160180200

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-1. East tarmac – July 26, 2009 lead concentrations (ng/m3). 

D-1 
East Tarmac 27th

0

102030405060708090

100

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-2. East tarmac – July 27, 2009 lead concentrations (ng/m3). 

D-2 
East Tarmac 28th

0

50

100150200250300

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-3. East tarmac – July 28, 2009 concentrations by source (ng/m3). 

D-3 
Residence 1: 26th

0

50

100150200250

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-4. Residence 1 – July 26, 2009 lead concentrations (ng/m3). 

D-4 
Residence 1: 27th

0

102030405060708090

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-5. Residence 1 – July 27, 2009 lead concentrations by source (ng/m3). 

D-5 
Residence 1: 28th

0

20406080

100120140160180

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-6. Residence 1 – July 28, 2009 lead concentrations (ng/m3). 

D-6 
Residence 2: 26th

0

20406080

100120140160

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-7. Residence 2 – July 26, 2009 lead concentrations (ng/m3). 

D-7 
Residence 2: 27th

0

1020304050607080

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-8. Residence 2 – July 27, 2009 lead concentrations (ng/m3). 

D-8 
Residence 2: 28th

0

20406080

100120140160180

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Hour of Day

Lead Concentration (ng/m3)

Figure D-9. Residence 2 – July 28, 2009 lead concentrations (ng/m3). 

D-9 
Figure D-10. All sources – July 26–July 27, 2009. 

D-10 
Figure D-11. All sources – July 27–July 28, 2009. 

D-11 
D-12 

Figure D-12. All sources – July 28–July 29, 2009.