alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DESMON LOEB,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0730 LKK PAN P

vs.

T. FELKER, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On

November 2, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion to compel defendants to respond to interrogatories

and requests for production of documents pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(2)(B) and for a

determination of the sufficiency to answers and objections to requests for admissions pursuant to

Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a). Defendants have not filed an opposition or a statement of non-opposition.

Plaintiff asserts that on May 21, 2005, he served discovery requests on defendants. 

He submits “Exhibit B” to demonstrate that defendants have not served responses but the

discovery requests in this exhibit relate to Loeb v. A. Colon, Civ. S 04-0547 EJG GGH P.

The court finds that plaintiff has not shown defendants have failed to respond to

discovery requests related to this action.

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00730-LKK -EFB Document 51 Filed 05/04/06 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

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s November 2, 2005,

motion to compel discovery is denied. 

DATED: May 4, 2006.

\004

\loeb0730.dny mtc disc (jfm)

Case 2:04-cv-00730-LKK -EFB Document 51 Filed 05/04/06 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4222 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4222

To adjust the boundary of the Mojave National Preserve in the State of 
  California to include the land within the Castle Mountains National 
                               Monument.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 1, 2024

  Mr. Padilla introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To adjust the boundary of the Mojave National Preserve in the State of 
  California to include the land within the Castle Mountains National 
                               Monument.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Mojave National Preserve Boundary 
Adjustment Act''.

SEC. 2. ADDITION OF CASTLE MOUNTAINS NATIONAL MONUMENT LAND TO THE 
              MOJAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE, CALIFORNIA.

    (a) Boundary Adjustment.--The boundary of the Mojave National 
Preserve established by section 502 of the California Desert Protection 
Act of 1994 (16 U.S.C. 410aaa-42) (referred to in this Act as the 
``Preserve'') is adjusted to include the Federal land described in 
subsection (b).
    (b) Description of Federal Land.--The Federal land referred to in 
subsection (a) is the approximately 20,920 acres of land designated as 
the Castle Mountains National Monument by Presidential Proclamation 
Number 9394, dated February 12, 2016 (54 U.S.C. 320301 note), as 
depicted on the map accompanying the proclamation.
    (c) Availability of Map.--The map referred to in subsection (b) 
shall be on file and available for public inspection in the appropriate 
offices of the National Park Service.
    (d) Administration.--The Secretary of the Interior (acting through 
the Director of the National Park Service) shall administer the Federal 
land added to the Preserve by subsection (a)--
            (1) as part of the Preserve; and
            (2) in accordance with applicable laws (including 
        regulations).
                                 <all>
```
Order entered October 21, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-01387-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF E.A.E., A Child

On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 366-30016-2009

ORDER

By letter dated October 15, 2013 the Collin County District Clerk notified the Court that 

the clerk’s record in this case had not been filed because payment had not yet been received. 

Our records show that appellant, who is pro se and incarcerated, filed a notice of appeal stating 

that he is indigent. Accordingly, we ORDER the Collin County District Clerk to file the clerk’s 

record within TEN DAYS of the date of this order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(a)(3).

Further, the reporter’s record is overdue. 

This is a parental termination case. Thus, it is the responsibility of the court reporter to 

prepare, certify, and timely file the reporter’s record, if any, and the trial court must direct the 

court reporter to immediately commence the preparation of any reporter’s record. The trial court 

must arrange for a substitute reporter if necessary. See TEX. R. APP. P. 28.4(b)(1).
Therefore, we ORDER Niki Garcia, Official Court Reporter for the 366th Judicial 

District Court, to file, within TEN DAYS of the date of this order, either (1) the reporter’s 

record; or (2) written verification that no hearings were recorded.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

DR. CHRIS THOMPSON, DC, PA, a/a/o KIMBERLY KRAM
, Appellant,

v.

SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 21

- 3018

[ January 19, 2022 ]

Appeal of a nonfinal order from the C ounty Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Terri

- Ann Miller , Judge; L.T. Case No.

COSO

- 21

- 004908

.

Chad A. Barr of Chad Barr Law, Altamonte Springs, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

P ER C URIA M

.

The county court sua sponte transferred venue without any showing that plaintiff ’s chosen venue was improper or that transfer was appropriate on forum non conveniens grounds. We issued an order directing Appellee to show cause why this case is not con trolled by Advanced Diagnostic

Gr oup v. Ocean Harbor Cas ualty Ins urance Co., 321 So. 3d 772, 773

- 74 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021), where this Court recently reversed a group of similar

orders. Appellee did not respond.

Accordingly, we reverse the order transferring venue and remand for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

C IKLIN
, F ORST and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
(Reap. Dec. 8137)

#### Clifford R. MacDougall *v.*United States

Entry No. C-803.

(Decided July 24, 1952)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*Charles J. Wagner,*Aeting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This case concerns the reappraisement of a bay gelding horse, “Sir Francis Drake,” exported from St. Stephen, Canada, and entered at the port of Portland, Maine.

An agreed set of facts, upon which the case was submitted, establishes foreign value, section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for appraisement of the animal in question — export value, section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 being no higher — and that such statutory foreign value is the invoice and entered value.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
# Soil Surveys by State

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Conservation Basics 
-  Natural Resource Concerns 
-  Soil 
-  Soil Surveys by State 

Historical soil surveys have been scanned, converted to portable document format (pdf), and archived on a public download site.

*Soil surveys issued prior to 2008 are archive copies that are not compatible with the screen-reader software used by the visually impaired. For accessibility assistance, email nrcs-spsd-508@usda.gov or call (402) 437-5499.*

Historical and supplemental documents are also available. Printed soil survey reports were the main source of soils information from 1899 to 2005. Most of these reports are county-based and have been converted to PDF (links below). USDA phased out the printing of reports after making Web Soil Survey the official source for information in 2005. For information about reference copies of a publication, contact your State Conservationist.

Historical soil surveys are being moved into https://archive.org/details/usda-soil-surveys. See "Access Historical Soil Surveys from Internet Archive" instructions in the Additional Documents section. 

##   Additional Documents

Access Historical Soil Surveys from Internet Archive(500.7 KB)

Instructions on how to access historical soil surveys(121.89 KB)

How to download scanned soil survey manuscript(683.85 KB)

Links_to_Scanned_Manuscripts_In_Box(64.13 KB)

##   Related Links

###   Web Soil Survey

Current, official soil survey information is on the Web Soil Survey which allows you to create custom reports by selecting a specific area of interest, such as a county, national park, or your property.

Open Application

### Block Diagrams

Locator map and list of block diagrams from published soil surveys.
Learn More

##   Contact Soils

Please contact us if you see something that needs to be updated, if you have any questions, or if you need accessibility assistance.
                  -    Soils Assistance 
                  -    402-437-5378402-437-5379 
                  -    Soils-Webmaster@usda.gov 

## Find Your Local Service Center

    USDA Service Centers are locations where you can connect with Farm Service Agency, Natural Resources Conservation Service, or Rural Development employees for your business needs. Enter your state and county below to find your local service center and agency offices. If this locator does not work in your browser, please visit offices.usda.gov.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**ESSEX
      PORTFOLIO, L.P.**


**Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer**


**Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted**


**Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**








Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of
      Section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), I, Keith R. Guericke,
      hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form
      10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 (the “Form 10-Q”) of Essex
      Portfolio, L.P. fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d),
      as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
      information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Essex Portfolio,
      L.P. at the dates of and for the periods presented.

















Date:
      November 7,
      2007                                                     /s/
      Keith R. Guericke


Keith
      R. Guericke


Chief
      Executive Officer and
      President,


Director
      and Vice Chairman of the Board,


Essex
      Property Trust, Inc., general partner


of
      Essex
      Portfolio, L.P.
No. 52583.

protests 47438-K, etc. (Baltimore).

#### Samuel Shapiro & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated herein. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries. The protests were sustained to this extent.
EXHIBIT 1

DECREE OF DIVORCE

 FILED IN 4th COURT OF APPEALS SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 08/21/2015 9:58:50 AM KEITH E. HOTTLE Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4218 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4218

To designate the visitor center for the First State National Historical 
 Park to be located at the Sheriff's House in New Castle, Delaware, as 
                the ``Thomas R. Carper Visitor Center''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 1, 2024

   Mr. Coons introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To designate the visitor center for the First State National Historical 
 Park to be located at the Sheriff's House in New Castle, Delaware, as 
                the ``Thomas R. Carper Visitor Center''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF THE VISITOR CENTER FOR THE FIRST STATE 
              NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK IN NEW CASTLE, DELAWARE, AS THE 
              ``THOMAS R. CARPER VISITOR CENTER''.

    (a) Designation.--The visitor center for the First State National 
Historical Park to be located at the Sheriff's House in New Castle, 
Delaware, or any successor to that visitor center that is constructed 
after the date of enactment of this Act and serves as the primary 
visitor center for the First State National Historical Park, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Thomas R. Carper Visitor Center''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the visitor center 
referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the 
``Thomas R. Carper Visitor Center''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY : CIVIL ACTION

:

 v. :

:

DAVID FORREST, et al. : NO. 02-4435

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of November, 2004, it is

Ordered that a STATUS CONFERENCE will be held on Monday, November

22, 2004 at 11:00 a.m., in chambers, room 7613 on the 7th floor.

ATTEST: or BY THE COURT

BY: 

 Deputy Clerk Anita B. Brody, J.

Civ 12 (9/83)

Copies FAXED on _________ to: Copies MAILED on ____________ to:

Case 2:02-cv-04435-AB Document 90 Filed 11/09/2004 Page 1 of 1
----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.4298 — Aggregate Industries/Foster Yeoman)

(2006/C 175/02)

(Text with EEA relevance)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

----
* 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. 96-11195

Conference Calendar

 

RICKEY LAVERN SHEPPARD,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CHARLES WILSON; DEBBIE MUSIC;

AMERICAN NATIONAL PROPERTY AND

CASUALTY COMPANY; AMERICAN NATIONAL

INSURANCE COMPANY; ANPAC GENERAL

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:96-CV-246

- - - - - - - - - -

February 21, 1997

Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Rickey Lavern Sheppard, #232818, appeals from the district

court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint. He has filed a

motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. 

The motion for leave to appeal IFP is GRANTED.

No initial partial filing fee is required. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(b)(4). Sheppard shall make monthly payments of twenty 
No. 96-11195

- 2 -

percent of the preceding month’s income credited to his prison

account. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody

of Sheppard is directed to forward payments from his prisoner

account to the clerk of the district court each time the amount

in his account exceeds $10 until the filing fee of $105 is paid. 

See id.

Sheppard argues that he was injured because of defendant

Wilson’s negligence and that the remaining defendants have

conspired to deprive him of reimbursement for his medical bills.

Because Sheppard’s claim lacks an arguable basis in law, the

district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing his

complaint as frivolous. See Eason v. Thaler, 14 F.3d 8, 9 (5th

Cir. 1994). Sheppard’s 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. 

See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

IFP GRANTED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
MS Word EAP SF 431594v1 64166-0003 8/2/05 ORDER RE CONTINUANCE

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 

29

PRINTED ON 

RECYCLED PAPER

JEFFER, MANGELS, BUTLER & MARMARO LLP 

MARTIN H. ORLICK (Bar No. 083908) 

Two Embarcadero Center, Fifth Floor 

San Francisco, California 94111-3824 

Telephone: (415) 398-8080 

Facsimile: (415) 398-5584 

Attorneys for Defendant GMRI, INC. dba 

RED LOBSTER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SHERIE WHITE, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

GMRI, INC. dba RED LOBSTER #555; and 

DOES 1 through 10, 

 Defendants. 

CASE NO. CIV. S-04-0620 WBS (KJM) 

ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE OF 

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT 

Date August 22, 2005 

Time: 1:30 p.m. 

Place: Room 5 

IT IS SO ORDERED that the hearing on plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment 

currently set for August 22, 2005 at 1:30 p.m. in the above entitled Court be continued to September 

6, 2005 at 1:30 p.m. The Final Pre-trial Conference, currently set for September 12, 2005, shall be 

continued to October 11, 2005 at 10:00 a.m. 

SO ORDERED: 

DATED: August 2, 2005 

Case 2:04-cv-00620-WBS -CMK Document 21 Filed 08/03/05 Page 1 of 1
# United States Court of Appeals

f or the Fifth Circuit

No. 21

- 40031 Summary Calendar

United States of America, Plaintiff

— Appellee ,

versus Jose Alberto Meza, Defendant

— Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:98

- CR

- 47

- 11

Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam : * Jose Alberto Meza, federal prisoner # 07094

- 078 , appeals the denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) motion for compassionate release . The district court denied relief based upon Meza’s failure to show that extraordinary and compelling reasons warranted relief, and we re view that

* Pursuant to 5th Cir cuit R ule 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 5th Cir cuit R ule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 15, 2022 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 21-40031 Document: 00516357745 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/15/2022No. 21

- 40031

2 denial for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Chambliss , 948 F.3d 691, 693 (5th Cir. 2020). Despite that Meza suffers from hypertension, diabetes, high cholesterol, and severe obesity, t he district court permissibly denied relief on the grounds that these conditions were sufficiently managed, Meza was fully vaccinated, and he was housed in a facility with no active COVID

- 19 infections among inmates. See United States v. Rodriguez , 27 F.4 th 1097, 1100

- 01 (5th Cir. 2022); United States v. Thompson , 984 F.3d 431, 433

- 35 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 141 S. Ct. 2688 (2021) . Meza’s assertions challenging the district court’s reasoning and the Government’s arguments on appeal are insufficiently br iefed to warrant consideration. See United States v. Scroggins , 599 F.3d 433, 446

- 47 (5th Cir. 2010); Yohey v. Collins , 985 F.2d 222, 224

- 25 (5th Cir. 1993)

. To the extent that Meza seeks to incorporate by reference arguments that he previously made in h is district

- court pleadings, he may not do so. See United States v. Abdo , 733 F.3d 562, 568 (5th Cir. 2013)

. Given its determination that Meza failed to show extraordinary and compelling reasons, the district court was not required to consider the 18 U.S .C. § 3553(a) factors. See Rodriguez , 27 F.4th at 1099

- 1101; Thompson , 984 F.3d at 433

- 35.
AFFIRMED

. Case: 21-40031 Document: 00516357745 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/15/2022
No. 66816.

#### Balfour, Guthrie & Co., Ltd., and Jasmes Loudon & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 287264-KS, etc. (Los Angeles).

*470Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *The Best Foods, Inc.*(47 C.C.P.A. 163, C.A.D. 751), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 58518.

protests 214514-K, etc. (Galveston).

#### W. R. Zanes & Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of jute bagging which was manufactured in Western Germany, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Printed on 100% recycled/recyclable paper with 100% post-consumer fiber and process chlorine free.

Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474

6/29/2014

Mr. David K. Paylor

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality

629 East Main Street

Richmond, Virginia 23219

Dear Director Paylor:

On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the 

Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality 

(VADEQ) pertaining to the applicable infrastructure elements for the 2010 sulfur dioxide national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) specified in section 110(a)(2)(A) through (M) of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA). EPA has determined that the submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is 

reviewing the submittal to prepare a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) action. 

If members of your staff have any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Ellen Schmitt, Office 

of Air Program Planning, at (215) 814-5787, or schmitt.ellen@epa.gov. She is the principal contact for 

this rulemaking. 

Sincerely, 

/s/

Diana Esher, Director

Air Protection Division 

cc: Michael Dowd, Air Division Director

 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality