alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 58001.

protests 184662-K and 184663-K (New York).

#### Robert M. Pitt Company, Incorporated *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that for duty purposes the clean content of the wool in question was determined in accordance with the instructions contained in T. D. 53159. Said T. D. 53159 was issued following the decision in *Fred Whitaker Company, Inc.v. United States*(27 Cust. Ct. 168, C. D. 1365), affirmed in *United States*v. *Fred Whitaker Company, Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 19, C. A. D. 492), wherein the statutory language, clean content of wool, as used in paragraph 1102 (b), was construed to mean the product commercially usable as wool and from which all the weight of grease and foreign material has been removed, including the wool fibers which are unavoidably and irrevocably lost as a result of commercially applied cleaning processes. Accordingly, the wool in question *457was held dutiable at the rate applied by the collector on the basis of the percentages of clean content as set forth in the column headed “Clean Content under T. D. 53159” in the schedule attached to and made a part of the decision in this case.
CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 8/3/2023 1

Standing to Seek an Absentee-Ballot Extension 

During a Pandemic 

Mays v. Thurston 

(James M. Moody, Jr., E.D. Ark. 4:20-cv-341) 

A district judge denied a request for an order during a global infectious pandemic extending the deadline for absentee ballots from received by election day to mailed by election day, finding that any difficulty that the plaintiffs would have in submitting their absentee ballots on time would arise from the pandemic and not from state action. 

Subject: Absentee and early voting. Topics: Covid-19; absentee 

ballots. 

In light of an upcoming March 31, 2020, runoff election in Arkansas during a 

global Covid-19 infectious pandemic, two voters and a coalition of religious 

leaders filed a federal complaint in the Eastern District of Arkansas on March 

26 seeking more accommodations for absentee voters than the governor had 

ordered.1 In particular, they wanted absentee ballots to be counted if mailed 

by election day, not just received by election day.2

 On the case’s second day, 

the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction.3

On March 30, Judge James M. Moody, Jr., denied the plaintiffs relief, finding that they did not have standing to pursue the complaint: “Any injury 

caused by Plaintiffs’ failing to take advantage of [the governor’s additional] 

available avenues to exercise their rights to vote are not caused by or fairly 

traceable to the actions of the State, but rather are caused by the global pandemic.”4

The plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their complaint on March 31.5

1. Complaint, Mays v. Thurston, No. 4:20-cv-341 (E.D. Ark. Mar. 26, 2020), D.E. 1. 

2. Id. at 3, 18–19 (requesting a receipt deadline of ten days after election day). 

3. Motion, id. (Mar. 27, 2020), D.E. 2. 

4. Opinion at 3, id. (Mar. 30, 2020), D.E. 11, 2020 WL 1531359. 

5. Voluntary Dismissal, id. (Mar. 31, 2020), D.E. 14.
Before the Third Division,

March 29, 1949

No. 52969.

#### Barrie Morell & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 63472-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

It was stipulated that the issue herein is the same in all material respects as that presented in *Mamary Bros., Inc.*v. *United States*(21 Cust. Ct. 135, C. D. 1142). 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 involved. The protests were sustained to this extent.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4175 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4175

        To reauthorize the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 18, 2024

  Mr. Lee (for himself and Mr. Romney) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To reauthorize the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act.

    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 ``RECA Extension Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE RADIATION EXPOSURE COMPENSATION ACT.

    (a) In General.--Section 3(d) of the Radiation Exposure 
Compensation Act (Public Law 101-426; 42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended 
by striking the first sentence and inserting ``The Fund shall terminate 
on the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of the RECA 
Extension Act of 2024.''.
    (b) Limitation on Claims.--Section 8(a) of the Radiation Exposure 
Compensation Act (Public Law 101-426; 42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended 
by striking ``the RECA Extension Act of 2022'' and inserting ``the RECA 
Extension Act of 2024''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

The undersigned herebycertifies, in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of American Bank NoteHolographics, Inc. (the “Company”), that the Quarterly Report of theCompany on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”)fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company atthe end of the period covered by the Report and the results of operations ofthe Company for the period covered by the Report.

 

 
|   | By: /s/ Kenneth H. Traub              |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Kenneth H. Traub                      |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

Date:  August 15, 2005

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906,or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, has been provided to AmericanBank Note Holographics, Inc. and will be retained by American Bank NoteHolographics, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissionor its staff upon request.

 

----
<PAGE>



                                                                      EXHIBIT 21


                           EARLE M. JORGENSEN COMPANY

                      LISTING OF THE COMPANY'S SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                                          STATE/
                                                        NATURE OF    DATE ACQUIRED        %             COUNTRY OF
NAME                                                     BUSINESS      OR CREATED       OWNED         INCORPORATION
----                                                    ---------    -------------      -----         -------------
<S>                                                   <C>            <C>                <C>           <C>
Earle M. Jorgensen (Canada) Inc. (formerly Kilsby        Metal
   Jorgensen Steel & Aluminum Inc.)                   Distributor      11/13/90          100%          Canada

                                                        Captive
Stainless Insurance Ltd.                               Insurance       03/20/96          100%          Bermuda

</TABLE>
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

BRIAN LEE CHRISTMAN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0884 FCD PAN P

vs.

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF CORRECTIONS, et al.

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On August 24, 2005, the Magistrate Judge issued an order governing discovery,

and on January 6, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued a scheduling order. On March 23, 2006,

plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of those orders. Local Rule 72-303(b), states “rulings

by Magistrate Judges shall be final if no reconsideration thereof is sought from the Court within

ten court days . . . from the date of service of the ruling on the parties.” E.D. Local Rule 72-

303(b). Plaintiff’s request for reconsideration of these orders is untimely.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s March 24, 2006, request

for reconsideration is denied.

DATED:March 31, 2006

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00884-FCD-EFB Document 57 Filed 03/31/06 Page 1 of 1
No. 62521.

#### Beer Stern Import Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 267350-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of narrow woven fabrics of cotton similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Beer Stern Import Corp.*v. *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 294, C. D. 1944), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
/**
 * @file
 * JavaScript behaviors for preventing duplicate webform submissions.
 */

(function ($, Drupal, once) {

  'use strict';

  /**
   * Submit once.
   *
   * @type {Drupal~behavior}
   *
   * @prop {Drupal~behaviorAttach} attach
   *   Attaches the behavior for preventing duplicate webform submissions.
   */
  Drupal.behaviors.webformSubmitOnce = {
    clear: function () {
      var $form = $('.js-webform-submit-once');
      $form.removeData('webform-submitted');
      $form.find('.js-webform-wizard-pages-links :submit, .form-actions :submit').removeClass('is-disabled');
      $form.find('.form-actions .ajax-progress.ajax-progress-throbber').remove();
    },
    attach: function (context) {
      $(once('webform-submit-once', '.js-webform-submit-once', context)).each(function () {
        var $form = $(this);
        // Remove data-webform-submitted.
        $form.removeData('webform-submitted');
        // Remove .js-webform-submit-clicked.
        $form.find('.js-webform-wizard-pages-links :submit, .form-actions :submit').removeClass('js-webform-submit-clicked');

        // Track which submit button was clicked.
        // @see http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5721724/jquery-how-to-get-which-button-was-clicked-upon-form-submission
        $form.find('.js-webform-wizard-pages-links :submit, .form-actions :submit').on('click', function () {
          $form.find('.js-webform-wizard-pages-links :submit, .form-actions :submit')
            .removeClass('js-webform-submit-clicked');
          $(this)
            .addClass('js-webform-submit-clicked');
        });

        $(this).on('submit', function () {
          // Find clicked button
          var $clickedButton = $form.find('.js-webform-wizard-pages-links :submit.js-webform-submit-clicked, .form-actions :submit.js-webform-submit-clicked');

          // Don't submit if client-side validation has failed.
          if (!$clickedButton.attr('formnovalidate') && $.isFunction(jQuery.fn.valid) && !($form.valid())) {
            return false;
          }

          // Track webform submitted.
          if ($form.data('webform-submitted')) {
            return false;
          }
          $form.data('webform-submitted', 'true');

          // Visually disable all submit buttons.
          // Submit buttons can't disabled because their op(eration) must to be posted back to the server.
          $form.find('.js-webform-wizard-pages-links :submit, .form-actions :submit').addClass('is-disabled');

          // Set the throbber progress indicator.
          $clickedButton.after(Drupal.theme.ajaxProgressThrobber());
        });
      });
    }
  };

})(jQuery, Drupal, once);
#### George D. WILLIAMS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Michael T.W. BELL, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 01-6146.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 12, 2001.

Decided April 18, 2001.

*127George D. Williams, pro se. Sandra Wal-laee-Smith, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, NC, for appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

George D. Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp.2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *See Williams v. Bell,*No. CA-00-307-5-F (E.D.N.C. Jan. 4, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
No. 50413.

#### Protest 91948-K of Sattler’s (Buffalo).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.
**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 Quarterly Report of European Micro Holdings, Inc. (the
      “ Company ”)
      on
      Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “ Report ”),
      the
      undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
      certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:




1.  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.


Date:October16,
                2006
            By:
            */s/ John B. Gallagher*Name:John
                  B. GallagherTitle:Co-Chief Executive OfficerDate:October16,
                2006
            By:
            */s/
              Harry D. Shields*Name:Harry
                  D. ShieldsTitle:Co-Chief Executive Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
      authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to European Micro Holdings, Inc. and will
      be
      retained by European Micro Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CARMELO IVAN RODRIGUEZ, : CIVIL ACTION

Petitioner, :

:

v. :

:

DAVID J. GOOD, et al., : No. 05-2704

Respondents. 

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 12th day of January, 2007, upon careful and independent

consideration of the petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, and after review of the Report and

Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Peter B. Scuderi, it is ORDERED that: 

1. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED. 

2. The petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED with prejudice.

3. There is no probable cause to issue a certificate of appealability.

4. The Clerk of the Court shall mark this case closed for statistical purposes. 

BY THE COURT

S/Gene E.K. Pratter

GENE E.K. PRATTER

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-02704-GEKP Document 11 Filed 01/17/07 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 8, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 77100]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-24628]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute on Drug Abuse Special 
Emphasis Panel; National Addiction and HIV Data Archive Program.
    Date: December 1, 2023.
    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug 
Abuse, 301 North Stonestreet Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual 
Meeting).
    Contact Person: Brian Stefan Wolff, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural Research, 
National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, 301 North Stonestreet Avenue, 
MSC 6021, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 480-1448, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#680a1a010906461f07040e0e28060100460f071e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0567776c646b2b726a696363456b6c6d2b626a73">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.277, Drug 
Abuse Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, Scientist 
Development Awards, and Research Scientist Awards; 93.278, Drug 
Abuse National Research Service Awards for Research Training; 
93.279, Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 2, 2023.
Melanie J. Pantoja,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-24628 Filed 11-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 7/7/2023 1

Verbal Requirements in Initiative Advertising 

Residents for The Beverly Hills 

Garden & Open Space Initiative v. City of Beverly Hills 

(Fernando M. Olguin, C.D. Cal. 2:16-cv-5532) 

On July 25, six days after a condominium-development initiative 

was approved for a city ballot in the November 8 general election, 

proponents of the initiative sought a temporary restraining order 

against a requirement that a substantial portion of their initiative 

advertising be devoted to a summary of the initiative prepared by 

city officials. On the following day, the district judge ordered the 

city to respond six days after that. On the day that the response was 

due, the parties stipulated an injunction reducing the amount of 

specified text required in advertising for the initiative. In the event, 

the initiative failed. 

Subject: Ballot measures. Topics: Ballot measure; campaign 

materials. 

Proponents of a Beverly Hills initiative in the November 8, 2016, general 

election concerning a condominium tower development filed a federal complaint in the Central District of California on July 25, six days after the initiative was approved for the ballot, challenging a requirement that the proponents devote so much of their advertising to a description of the initiative 

prepared by city officials.1

 With their complaint, the plaintiffs filed an application for a temporary restraining order.2

On the following day, Judge Fernando M. Olguin ordered the city to respond to the application by August 1, with an optional reply filed by August 

3.3 Instead, the parties filed a proposed stipulated injunction on August 1 reducing the amount of specified text required in the plaintiffs’ advertising.4

Judge Olguin issued the stipulated injunction on August 2.5

On November 8, the initiative failed.6 The parties stipulated dismissal of 

the action on November 14.7

1. Complaint, Residents for The Beverly Hills Garden & Open Space Initiative v. City of 

Beverly Hills, No. 2:16-cv-5532 (C.D. Cal. July 25, 2016), D.E. 1. 

2. Temporary-Restraining-Order Application, id. (C.D. Cal. July 25, 2016), D.E. 6. 

3. Minutes, id. (July 26, 2016), D.E. 13 (also ordering service of the complaint on the city 

by 5:00 p.m. on July 27). 

4. Stipulation, id. (Aug. 1, 2016), D.E. 22. 

5. Order, id. (Aug. 2, 2016), D.E. 23. 

6. See Sarah Parvini, Two Development Measures Rejected, L.A. Times, Nov. 10, 2016, at 

B8. 

7. Stipulation, Residents, No. 2:16-cv-5532 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2016), D.E. 24.
06

- 50 15

- cr

U S A v. S te w a rt e t al. 

### U NITE D S TAT ES C OUR T OF AP PE ALS F OR THE S EC ON D C IR C U IT

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ___ At a Stated Te rm of the United States Court of A ppeals for the Second Circuit, held a t the Daniel Patric k Moy

nihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pear l Street, in the City of Ne w York, on the 19 day

of Nove mber, two thousand a nd nine. th PRES ENT: J ohn M. Walker, J r.,

Gu ido Ca la

br e si, Robert D. Sack, Cir c uit J ud ge s.

______________________________________________ United States of Amer ica,

Ap pe lle e -C ro ss- Ap pe lla nt, OR DE R v . D o c k e t N u m b e r : 0 6

- 5 0 1 5

- c r ( L)

L y nne Stewar

t, Mohammed Yousry , Ahmed Abde l Sattar, De fe nd an ts- Ap pe lla nts -C

ro ss- Ap pe lle e s.

______________________________________________ Appellant L y

nne Stewar

t moves for " Reconsider ation of F orthwith Surrende r," and an emer g ency

stay of for thwith surrende r pending the re solution of this motion for rec onsideration. Appellant Mohammed Y ousry moves for a

n "immediate stay

of [the Court's] Order

direc ting the dis tr ic t c ou rt

to o rd e r h is f

or thw ithsu rr e nd e r . .. ," a nd

a sta y pe nd ingfu

rt he r c on sid e ratio n o f t

his motion. The Governme nt has filed a me morandum in opposition to t he motions toge ther with a letter fr om the Fe dera l Bure au of Prisons. Upon conside ration, I T I S HEREBY ORDERED tha t, based in par t upon the asser

tions contained in the submissi ons of the Gove rnment, the motions are DENI ED.

FOR THE COURT,

__________________ Catherine O ’Ha g an Wolfe, Clerk