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

ANTHONY BARBARIN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-0894 RRB KJM P

vs.

A.K. SCRIBNER,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner has requested an extension of time to file and serve a traverse pursuant

to the court's order of November 30, 2005. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that:

1. Petitioner’s January 31, 2006 motion for an extension of time is granted; and

2. Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of this order in which to file and

serve a traverse. 

DATED: February 7, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

mp

barb0894.111

Case 2:04-cv-00894-MDS Document 33 Filed 02/07/06 Page 1 of 1
### The Honorable Donald J. Stohr, United States District Judge 1 

### for the Eastern District of Missouri.



# United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-3065

___________ Thomas A. Fascetti, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. International Paper Company, a * New York corporation, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: April 16, 1997 Filed: May 7, 1997

___________ Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Thomas A. Fascetti appeals from the order of the District Court 1 granting summary judgment to International PaperCompany, the defendant in this case of, among o ther things, alleged employment discrimination based on age. Having consi dered the briefs and record and the arguments of the parties, we conclude that no error of law appears and that summary judgmen t was correctly entered against Fascetti on all of his claims.

### -2-

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT
(Reap. Dec. 10717)

#### Jacky Products Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 936867.

(Decided April 15, 1964)

*Brooks é Brooks*for tlie plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement involves certain plastic baby pants, exported from Haiti and entered at the port of New York.

Stipulated facts, upon which the case has been submitted, establish that the proper basis for appraisement of the articles in question is constructed value, as defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of’ 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (T.D. 54165), and that such statutory value therefor is 0.3964 per dozen, and I so hold.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
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

STIPULATION/ORDER TO TEMPORARILY STAY PROCEEDINGS

JOHN S. GILMORE, SBN: 32491

JENNY J. RIM, SBN: 231584

RANDOLPH CREGGER & CHALFANT 

1030 G Street

Sacramento, California 95814

Telephone: (916) 443-4443

Facsimile: (916) 443-2124 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DENNIS ROBINSON, et al.

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

DEBORA G. LUTHER

Assistant U.S. Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, California 95814

Telephone: (916) 554-2720

Attorneys Defendants

United States of America and

Department of the Interior

[Bureau of Indian Affairs]

(collectively, “Federal Defendants”)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DENNIS ROBINSON, SPENCER

ROBINSON, JR., RICKE ROBINSON,

CYNTHIA ROBINSON, VICKIE ROBINSON,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, as Trustee

for the Indians of the Mooretown Rancheria,

aka MAIDU INDIANS OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS] and DOES

1 - 50, inclusive, 

Defendants.

______________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No.: CIV.S-04-0734 DFL KJM

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO

TEMPORARILY STAY PROCEEDINGS

[LR 83-141]

Case 2:04-cv-00734-MCE -CMK Document 46 Filed 02/01/06 Page 1 of 3
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

STIPULATION/ORDER TO TEMPORARILY STAY PROCEEDINGS -2-

The parties, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate that this matter may

be stayed for three months from the date of order thereon. Cause therefore is that currently

negotiations are taking place between the Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California

(“Rancheria”) and Plaintiffs. If successful, those negotiations may resolve or moot the above

referenced action. Therefore, the parties agree that a stay of the action is appropriate to permit a

continuation of those efforts which Plaintiffs believe can be concluded in three months.

Respectfully submitted,

DATED: January 11, 2006 RANDOLPH CREGGER & CHALFANT LLP

By: - /s/ John S. Gilmore 

JOHN S. GILMORE

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

DATED: January 24, 2006 McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Debora G. Luther 

DEBORA G. LUTHER

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorneys for Federal Defendants

Case 2:04-cv-00734-MCE -CMK Document 46 Filed 02/01/06 Page 2 of 3
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

STIPULATION/ORDER TO TEMPORARILY STAY PROCEEDINGS -3-

ORDER

FOR GOOD CAUSE shown, it is hereby ORDERED that this action be stayed for a

period of three months, commencing with the date entered below. Fourteen days prior to the

expiration of the stay, the parties shall submit a joint status report to the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 1/30/2006

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00734-MCE -CMK Document 46 Filed 02/01/06 Page 3 of 3
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-30360 Conference Calendar

__________________ LUIS ENRIQUE GONZALEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CV-192

- - - - - - - - - - (October 18, 1995) Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appellant Luis Enrique Gonzalez, a federal prison inmate, filed a petition for mandamus, seeking to require the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) either to provide him with a deportation hearing or to withdraw its detainer on him. Subsequently, he filed a motion requesting the district court to appoint counsel to represent him at his INS deportation hearing. The magistrate judge denied the motion, and Gonzalez did notNo. 95-30360 -2- appeal the ruling to the district court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The magistrate judge also filed a report recommending denial of Gonzalez's mandamus petition. The district court, in effect adopting the report, dismissed the action. The court did not advert to the magistrate judge's order denying the motion for counsel. The only issue which Gonzalez states or discusses in his appellate brief is that counsel should be appointed to represent him before the INS, due to his indigency. Because Gonzalez failed to appeal the magistrate judge's denial of his counsel motion to the district court, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider it. Colburn v. Bunge Towing, Inc ., 883 F.2d 372, 379 (5th Cir. 1989). APPEAL DISMISSED.
Exhibit 21

                               XANSER CORPORATION
                                 SUBSIDIARY LIST



XANSER CORPORATION (formerly Kaneb Services, Inc.)
Corporate Insurers Ltd
Xtria LLC (formerly Fields Financial Services, Inc.)
Double Eagle Cabling and Communications LLC
National Asset Information Services, Inc.
CPIA, Inc.
Viata Corporation
Kaneb Financial Corporation (formerly Asset Based Lenders, Inc.)
Furmanite Equipment Leasing Company LLC
  (formerly Kaneb Equipment Leasing Company)
Furmanite Worldwide, Inc. (formerly Kaneb International, Inc.)
Furmanite America Inc.
Furmanite Offshore Services, Inc.
Furmanite Malaysia LLC
Specialty Industrial Services Sdn. Bhd.
Furmanite (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.
Furmanite Australia Pty Ltd (formerly Denon Pty Ltd)
Furmanite NZ Limited
   (formerly Furmanite V & P Eng. Ltd, formerly V & P Eng. Ltd)
Furmanite Holding AS
Furmanite AS (Norway)
CMS:  Corrision Monitoring Services AS
Furmanite SA
Furmanite NV
Metalock NV (Belgium)
Furmeta Holding BV
Metaholding BV
Metalock BV
Furmanite BV
Furmanite East Asia Limited (Hong Kong)
Furmanite Singapore PTE Limited
Furmanite Limited (formerly Kaneb UK plc)
Furmanite 1986 Limited
Furmanite International Limited
Furmanite Germany, Inc.
Management Services Furmanite Holding GmbH
Furmanite Technische Dienstleisfungen GmbH (formerly Zweipack GmbH)
Furmanite Industrie Service GmbH
Xanser Financial LLC
Xanser Services LLC
Xanser Investments, Inc.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Abgenix, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2003, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuantto § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934; and

 

(2)           The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

August 14,2003

 

 
|   | /s/ KURT  LEUTZINGER                         |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Kurt Leutzinger                              |
|   | Chief Financial Officer                      |
|   | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 

 

A signedoriginal of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided toAbgenix, Inc. and will be retained by Abgenix, Inc. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Elder, Felton and Senior Judge Willis

SHIRLEY SIMMONS MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 2596-03-1 PER CURIAM FEBRUARY 24, 2004 MARSHALL DARDEN

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF NORFOLK Marc Jacobson, Judge (Curtis T. Brown, on brief), for appellant. (André A. Foreman, on brief), for appellee. Shirley Simmons appeals the Se ptember 16, 2003 or der of the circuit court denying her motion to disallow a reduction in Marshall Dard en’s child support obligation. On appeal, Simmons contends the trial court erred by ruling (1) severance pay invested by Dard en into an individual retirement account should not be considered as imputed income; and (2) Darden could receive a reduction in his child support ob ligation following his voluntary re tirement. Upon reviewing the record and briefs, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. Accordi ngly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial court. See Rule 5A:27. Analysis Simmons’ counsel endorsed the court’s orde r “Seen and Objected to” and did not particularize the basis for her obj ection. The parties’ written stat ement of facts also contains no information regarding the basis fo r Simmons’ objection to the order.

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1- 413, this opinion is not designated for publication.- 2 - Rule 5A:18 provides that “[n]o ru ling of the trial court . . . wi ll be considered as a basis for reversal unless the objection was stated together with the grounds therefor at the time of the ruling, except for good cause shown or to enable the Court of A ppeals to attain the ends of justice.” “Ordinarily, endorsement of an order ‘Seen and object ed to’ is not specific enough to meet the requirements of Rule 5A:18 because it does not sufficiently alert the trial court to the claimed error.” Herring v. Herring, 33 Va. App. 281, 286, 532 S.E.2d 923, 926 (2000) (quoting Mackie v. Hill, 16 Va. App. 229, 231, 429 S.E.2d 37, 38 (1993)). Therefore, Rule 5A:18 bars our consideration of Simmons’ arguments on appeal . Moreover, the record does not reflect any reason to invoke the good cause or ends of justice exceptions to Rule 5A:18. Accordingly, we summarily af firm the decision of the tr ial court. See Rule 5A:27. Affirmed.
Case No. 7,873.

#### KNAP et al. v. The ELIZA AND SARAH.

[1 Pet. Adm. 200.] 1

District Court, D. Pennsylvania.

1802.

Seaman’s Wages — Loss oe Boat — Neghgexce.

The mate and two hands were sent from the ship on shore, with the boat. One of the hands was detached on the business of the ship, from the boat. The mate first, and then the other seaman, left the boat; and it was stolen. The sailor detached is not responsible, but the whole is chargeable to the mate and the negligent seaman.

The mate [Reuben Knap], with two hands, were sent from the ship on a special mission, in the boat. The mate detached one of the hands from the boat lying at the quay, on the business of the ship. He, the mate, and the other seaman, ought to have taken care and charge of the boat: but he first, and then the seaman, left the boat, on their own affairs. The boat was stolen.

1

 [Reported by Richard Peters, Jr., Esq.]

BY THE COURT.

The sailor detached is not responsible. The loss must fall on the mate, and the other negligent seaman. Sailors taken by pirates or enemies, when on special mission, are entitled to wages for the voyage. They have this advantage separate from those in the ship; who lose their wages, if captured in the ship; they must therefore be separated in cases of negligence. The loss must fall on such of the sailors as are in fault; and those in the ship must not pai’take in retributing the owner. The seaman in the business of the ship, sent from the boat, was the only hand in execution of the mission. The mate and the other seaman abandoned their duty, and must bear all the consequences of their fault and gross negligence.
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

VANCE EDWARD JOHNSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0776 LKK EFB P

vs.

D.L. RUNNELS, et al.,

Defendants. 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 General Order No. 262.

On September 8, 2006, 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 twenty days. 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 72-

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 71 Filed 12/21/06 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:

1. The findings and recommendations filed September 8, 2006, are adopted in

full; and

2. Plaintiff’s claims against defendants J. Lewis, Cooper, Jimenez, Bailey,

Wagner, J. Cox, D. L. Runnels, Brewer, A. Martin, T. Robertson, T. Gillam, C. Adam and D.

Peddicord are dismissed for failure to state a claim.

DATED: December 20, 2006.

Case 2:04-cv-00776-TLN-EFB Document 71 Filed 12/21/06 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 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMAS TORCHIA, 2:04-cv-0673-GEB-CMK

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

CITY OF REDDING, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in

forma pauperis, bring this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On September 7, 2005, the magistrate judge filed

findings and recommendations herein which were served on

plaintiff and which contained notice to plaintiff that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed

within fifteen days. Plaintiff has filed objections to the

findings and recommendations.

Case 2:04-cv-00673-GEB -CMK Document 26 Filed 09/28/05 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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 72-304, 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed September

7, 2005, are adopted in full; 

2. The “stay” of proceedings entered by the court on

November 12, 2004, is lifted;

3. Plaintiff’s request for injunctive relief is

denied;

4. This action is dismissed without prejudice; and

5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter

judgment and close this action.

Dated: September 28, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00673-GEB -CMK Document 26 Filed 09/28/05 Page 2 of 2
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 18-40649

Conference Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Sergio Martinez-Tapia, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:17-CR-953-1

Before Smith, Stewart, and Higginson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Sergio Martinez-Tapia has 

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 

(5th Cir. 2011). Martinez-Tapia has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 10, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 18-40649 Document: 00515668754 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/10/2020
No. 18-40649

2

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to 

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities 

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42. 

Case: 18-40649 Document: 00515668754 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/10/2020
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

1

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

Import a Check Capture Administrator Offline Logon Profile

To import the Check Capture Administrator (CCA) Offline Logon Profile, complete the following 

steps:

1. Double-click the OTCnet Offline (Production or QA) icon located on the workstation 

desktop.

Or

Click Start>Programs>OTCnet Offline (Production or QA). The OTCnet Offline Startup

window appears. 

2. Click the File menu. Click Import User Profile as shown in Figure 1. The Select User 

Profile File dialog box appears.

Figure 1. OTCnet Offline Startup

3. Navigate to the location on the workstation where the Check Capture Administrator Offline 

Logon Profile is saved. Select the file and click Import as shown in Figure 2. Proceed with 

starting OTCnet Offline on the workstation.
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

2

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

Figure 2. Select User Profile

• The default location on the Select User Profile File dialog box is the user’s My 

Documents folder.

• Once you have successfully imported the Check Capture Administrator Offline Logon 

Profile, you receive the Successfully imported user profile message.

Application Tips
Before the Third Division,

May 31, 1962

No. 66824.

#### Lido Toy Co. *v.*United States,

protest 60/1520 (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation *of counsel that the*issues are similar to those involved in Abstract 57104, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
**Part 1, 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
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 20 15 - 0415 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 20 15 - CE - 0 01 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**