alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
19–008

108TH CONGRESS REPORT " HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ! 1st Session 108–258 

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2989, DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION AND TREASURY AND 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2004

SEPTEMBER 3, 2003.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. REYNOLDS, from the Committee on Rules, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H. Res. 351] 

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House 

Resolution 351, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House 

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 2989, the Departments of Transportation and Treasury, and Independent Agencies Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004, an open rule. The rule 

provides for one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule waives all points of order 

against consideration of the bill. 

The rule waives points of order against provisions in the bill for 

failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI (prohibiting unauthorized appropriations or legislative provisions in an appropriations 

bill), except as specified in the resolution. 

The rule authorizes the Chair to accord priority in recognition to 

Members who have pre-printed their amendments in the Congressional Record. 

Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. 

The waiver of all points of order is needed because there are numerous legislative provisions included in the bill that violate clause 

2 of rule XXI (prohibiting unauthorized appropriations or legislative provisions in an appropriations bill).

2

COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to clause 3(b) of House rule XIII the results of each 

record vote on an amendment or motion to report, together with 

the names of those voting for and against, are printed below: 

Rules Committee record vote No. 195

Date: September 3, 2003. 

Measure: H.R. 2989—Departments of Transportation and Treasury and Independent Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2004. 

Motion by: Mr. Frost. 

Summary of motion: To modify the rule to waive all points of 

order against section 212 which prohibits contracts with certain 

foreign incorporated entities. 

Results: Defeated 2 to 5. 

Vote by Members: Linder—Nay; Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings 

(WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Frost—Yea; McGovern—Yea; Dreier—

Nay.

Rules Committee record vote No. 196

Date: September 3, 2003. 

Measure: H.R. 2989—Departments of Transportation and Treasury and Independent Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2004. 

Motion by: Mr. McGovern. 

Summary of motion: To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for the amendment offered by Representative Flake 

which prohibits the use of funds for enforcement of the Cuba travel 

ban. 

Results: Defeated 2 to 5. 

Vote by Members: Linder—Nay; Diaz-Balart—Nay; Hastings 

(WA)—Nay; Sessions—Nay; Frost—Yea; McGovern—Yea; Dreier—

Nay.

Æ
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

CALIFORNIA,

Plaintiff,

v.

L.M.A. MARKETING, INC., 

DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE

FICTITIOUS BUSINESS NAME 

OF MORTGAGE CONCEPTS,

Defendant.

___________________________/

No. CIV-S-04-0061 MCE/KJM

ORDER RE: SETTLEMENT AND

DISPOSITION

Pursuant to the representations of the attorney for

defendant, the court has determined that this case is settled.

In accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 16-160,

dispositional documents are to be filed on or before December 6,

2005. 

///

///

///

///

///

Case 2:04-cv-00061-MCE -KJM Document 24 Filed 11/17/05 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

Failure to comply with this order may be grounds for the

imposition of sanctions on any and all counsel as well as any

party or parties who cause non-compliance with this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: November 16, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Case 2:04-cv-00061-MCE -KJM Document 24 Filed 11/17/05 Page 2 of 2
July 6, 1961

Reap. Dec. 10047.

#### Oscar E. Eggen (American Express Co.) et al. *v.*United States,

¡Motion by plaintiffs.
EXHIBIT
32.2








CERTIFICATION
OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTS







I,
Brian Chaiken, Chief Financial Officer of Z Trim Holdings, Inc., an Illinois
corporation (the "Registrant"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
the Report on Form 10-Q for the period of the Registrant from January 1, 2010
through March 31, 2010 (the "Report") which this statement accompanies
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and




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







Dated:  May
21, 2010


By                 /s/ Brian
Chaiken


Brian Chaiken


Chief Financial Officer








A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         8,468
<SECURITIES>                                   3,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  4,372
<ALLOWANCES>                                   157
<INVENTORY>                                    2,047
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               19,030
<PP&E>                                         4,620
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,443
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 23,625
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,057
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       58
<OTHER-SE>                                     21,481
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   23,625
<SALES>                                        7,345
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               7,460
<CGS>                                          1,863
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  6,534
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (938)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (387)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (551)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (551)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.09)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC, a 

Delaware Limited Liability Company; and 

BLACKWATER LODGE AND TRAINING 

CENTER, INC., a Delaware Corporation

Plaintiffs,

vs.

WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE 

COMPANY, a Georgia Corporation

and

EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY, an Illinois 

Corporation

and

FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW 

YORK, a South Carolina Corporation

and

LIBERTY INSURANCE UNDERWRITERS, a 

Massachusetts Corporation

Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 05-6020 (PBT)

RULE 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant, Westchester 

Surplus Lines Insurance Company states that it is an indirect subsidiary of a publicly held 

corporation, ACE, Ltd.

BY: /s/ Francis J. Deasey (Valid Code FD1214)_________

FRANCIS J. DEASEY, ESQUIRE (Atty. ID 25699)

Deasey, Mahoney & Bender, Ltd.

1800 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1300

Philadelphia, PA 19103

215-587-9400 (PHONE)/215-587-9456 (FAX)

fjdeasey@dmbphila.com

DATED: 3/26/07

Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 45 Filed 03/27/2007 Page 1 of 2

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 45

Dockets.Justia.com
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Francis J. Deasey, Esquire, hereby certify that I have served upon all persons listed below a true and 

correct copy of Defendant, Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company in the above-captioned matter this date 

by First-Class mail, postage prepaid to all parties listed below:

Harvey Bartle, IV, Esquire

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP

1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20004

Francis P. Burns, III, Esquire

Lavin O'Neil Ricci Cedrone & Disipio 

190 North Independence Mall West 

6TH & Race Streets 

Suite 500 

Philadelphia, PA 19106

Michael Robert Carlson, Esquire

Ronald P. Schiller, Esquire

DLA PIPER US LLP 

One Liberty Place, Suite 4900 

1650 Market Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103

John C. Sullivan, Esquire

Post & Schell, P.C.

1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard 

Four Penn Center 

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2808

Thomas T. Locke, Esquire

Rebecca A. Woods, Esquire

Seyfarth Shaw LLP 

815 Connecticut Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20006-4004

Dennis J. Valenza, Esquire

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP 

1701 Market Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2921

Brian A. Kahn, Esquire

L.D. Simmons, II, Esquire

Helms Mulliss & Wicker PLLC 

201 North Tryon Street

P.O. Box 31247 

Charlotte, NC 28202

By: __s/ Francis J. Deasey (FD1214)_____ 

FRANCIS J. DEASEY, ESQUIRE 

Dated: March 26, 2007

Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 45 Filed 03/27/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### Charles R. EVANS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Christina KLAEGER, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 00-4353.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 12, 2001.

*327Before BATCHELDER and MOORE, Circuit Judges; BERTELSMAN, District Judge.*

*

 The Honorable William O. Bertelsman, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation.

This pro se Ohio litigant appeals a district court judgment dismissing his civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(l), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a).

Seeking declaratory relief, Charles R. Evans brought this action against his former wife, Christina Klaeger, alleging that the Court of Common Pleas for Franklin County, Ohio, Domestic Relations Division violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to the equal protection of the law and protection of his liberty interest in the custody of his child when it designated him the non-custodial parent of Hannah M. Evans. The district court dismissed the complaint after concluding that it lacked jurisdiction over the state court child custody decision. This timely appeal followed.

This court reviews de novo dismissals for lack of jurisdiction. *See Greater Detroit Res. Recovery Auth. v. United States EPA*916 F.2d 317, 319 (6th Cir.1990). Such review reflects that the district court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3). Federal courts have no jurisdiction to resolve domestic relations disputes involving child custody. *See Ankenbrandt v. Richards,*504 U.S. 689, 703, 112 S.Ct. 2206, 119 L.Ed.2d 468 (1992). While Evans attempts to assert civil rights claims, his complaint clearly questions the underlying domestic relations issues by challenging an Ohio court child custody decision.

Additionally, Evans’s claims are barred by the *Rooker-Feldman*doctrine. Under this doctrine, federal courts lack jurisdiction to review a case litigated and decided in state court as only the United States Supreme Court has jurisdiction to correct state court judgments. *See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman,*460 U.S. 462, 482 & n. 16, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983); *Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.,*263 U.S. 413, 415-16, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923). A fair reading of the complaint reveals that Evans’s federal case is essentially an impermissible appeal of the state court judgment as it merely raises specific grievances regarding decisions of Ohio’s domestic relations courts. Thus, the district court lacked jurisdiction over any challenge Evans is making to the legal proceedings held in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas.

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is affirmed. Rule 34(j)(2)(C), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION 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 Annual Report of Independence Lead Mines Company (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A No. 2 for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bernard C. Lannen, President of the Company, certify, 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/ Bernard C. Lannen President  Dated: December 13, 2007
EXHIBIT 21

EXHIBIT NO. 21 - SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRATION 
INTERNATIONAL DAIRY QUEEN, INC.

                                        Jurisdiction of
Subsidiary (1)                          Incorporation
--------------                          -------------

American Dairy Queen Corporation        Delaware
Orange Julius of America                California
DQF, Inc.                               Minnesota
Golden Skillet International, Inc.      Minnesota
Karmelkorn Shoppes, Inc.                Delaware
Dairy Queen of Georgia, Inc.            Minnesota
Dairy Queen Canada, Inc. (2)(3)         Canada (Federal)

(1)  All subsidiaries are 100% owned by Registrant.

(2)  IDQ Canada, Inc.{Canada (Federal)} is a wholly-owned subsidiary of
     Dairy Queen Canada, Inc.

(3)  Orange Julius Canada, Ltd. {Canada (Federal)} is a wholly-owned subsidiary
     of Dairy Queen Canada, Inc.

Registrant also owns 60% of the outstanding capital stock of Firstaff, Inc., a
Minnesota corporation.
CERTIFICATE 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 Annual Report of CEC Industries, Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Jeffrey Sternberg, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, 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 respect, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

/s/    Jeffrey Sternberg
---------------------------------
Name:  Jeffrey Sternberg
Title: Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


Date: August 9, 2004
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Brian R.Ervine, certify that:

1. I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Evolving Systems, Inc.;

2. Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

(b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date: August 12, 2005                                               |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                     |
| /s/ BRIAN R. ERVINE                                                      |   |
| Brian R. Ervine                                                          |
| Executive Vice President and Chief Financial and  Administrative Officer |

 

----
Page 4 of 12
 

Page 5 of 12
Page 6 of 12
 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 7 of 12
 

 

 

Page 8 of 12
 

 

Page 9 of 12
 

 

 

 

 

Page 10 of 12
 

Page 11 of 12
Page 12 of 12
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

TOMMY ROY KEETON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0697 GEB JFM P

vs.

SERGEANT CAROLL, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On April 22, 2005, defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 12(b). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. 

Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file

written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any

opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .” On January 20, 2005, plaintiff was advised of the

requirements for filing an opposition to the motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may

be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. 

Local Rule 11-110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be

grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the

inherent power of the Court.” In the order filed January 20, 2005, plaintiff was advised that

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00697-ALA Document 42 Filed 07/21/05 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

2

failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be

dismissed.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days of the

date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any he has, to the motion to dismiss or a

statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

DATED: July 21, 2005. 

1

keet0697.46osc2

Case 2:04-cv-00697-ALA Document 42 Filed 07/21/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 59497.

protest 256133-K (New York).

#### Vandegrift Forwarding Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issues are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *John P. Herber & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(30 Cust. Ct. 193, C. D. 1519), the protest was dismissed, and the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law (28 U. S. C. § 2636. (d)).
Exhibit
10.2


 


BIDZ.COM,
INC.


 


AMENDMENT NO. 1

TO

2006 STOCK AWARD PLAN


 


THIS
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO 2006 STOCK AWARD PLAN of BIDZ.com, Inc., a
Delaware corporation (the “Company”), is
entered into effective as of June 5, 2008, subject to approval by the
stockholders of the Company;


 


WHEREAS, the Board
established the 2006 Stock Award Plan (the “Plan”) to facilitate equity
compensation and other incentive awards to selected directors, officers,
employees, and consultants; and


 


WHEREAS, the Board
desires to amend the Plan to increase the number of shares available for awards
under the Plan by a total of 500,000 shares;


 


WHEREAS, the Board has
approved this Amendment No. 1 effective as of the date hereof, subject to
approval by the stockholders of the Company;


 


WHEREAS, capitalized terms
used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed to them
in the Plan;


 


NOW,
THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


 


1.             Section 4(a) of the Plan is amended
in the first sentence thereof by replacing the phrase “1,000,000 Shares” with
the phrase “1,500,000 Shares.”


 


2.             Except as expressly
modified and amended by the terms of this Amendment No. 1, all of the
other terms and conditions of the Plan remain in full force and effect.


 


 


	
   

  	
  BIDZ.COM, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Name:

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Title: