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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Wage & Investment Reducing Taxpayer Burden (Notices) Issue Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, February 1, 2007, from 11 a.m. ET. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7979. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Wage & Investment Reducing Taxpayer Burden (Notices) Issue Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Thursday, February 1, 2007, from 11 a.m. ET via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or write Sallie Chavez, TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Sallie Chavez. Ms. Chavez can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org*.                 

The agenda will include: Various IRS issues. 

Dated: January 8, 2007. 

John Fay, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E7-385 Filed 1-12-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
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

CHANCELLOR WADE, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1711 GEB DAD P

vs.

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

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

seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On April 21, 2006, the court ordered the United States Marshal to serve process

upon the defendant in this case. The Marshal was directed to attempt to secure a waiver of

service before attempting personal service on defendant. If a waiver of service was not returned

within sixty days, the Marshal was directed to effect personal service on the defendant in

accordance with the provisions of Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C.

§ 566(c), without prepayment of costs, and to file the return of service with evidence of any

attempt to secure a waiver of service and with evidence of all costs subsequently incurred in

effecting personal service. 

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01711-GEB-DAD Document 25 Filed 09/22/06 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

On September 11, 2006, the United States Marshal filed a return of service with a

USM-285 form showing total charges of $53.45 for effecting personal service on defendant

Chaplain Onesinius Ortiz. The form shows that a waiver of service form was mailed to the

defendant on April 25, 2006, and that no response was received. 

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides, in pertinent part, as

follows: 

An individual, corporation, or association that is subject to service

under subdivision (e), (f), or (h) and that receives notice of an

action in the manner provided in this paragraph has a duty to avoid

unnecessary costs of serving the summons . . . .

If a defendant located within the United States fails to comply with

a request for waiver made by a plaintiff located within the United

States, the court shall impose the costs subsequently incurred in

effecting service on the defendant unless good cause for the failure

be shown.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(2).

The court finds that defendant Chaplain Onesinius Ortiz was given the

opportunity required by Rule 4(d)(2) to waive service and has failed to comply with the request. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within fourteen days from the date of this order defendant Chaplain Onesinius

Ortiz shall pay to the United States Marshal the sum of $53.45, unless within that time defendant

files a written statement showing good cause for his failure to waive service. The court does not

intend to extend this fourteen day period.

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the U.S.

Marshal.

DATED: September 22, 2006.

DAD:bb/4

wade1711.taxcost

Case 2:04-cv-01711-GEB-DAD Document 25 Filed 09/22/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 47845.

Suit 4413.

#### United *States*v. *Border Brokerage Co., Inc.*

C. D. 672. Appeal dismissed December 14. 1942.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ANCHOR GLASS CONTAINER CORPORATION INCLUDED IN FORM 10-Q
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                           1,893
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   71,238
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,152
<INVENTORY>                                    122,785
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               202,299
<PP&E>                                         382,015
<DEPRECIATION>                                  55,906
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 635,356
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          155,806
<BONDS>                                        202,826
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           55,983
<PREFERRED>                                         34
<COMMON>                                           139
<OTHER-SE>                                      63,765
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   635,356
<SALES>                                        149,187
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               149,187
<CGS>                                          143,393
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  143,393
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,204
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (7,756)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (7,756)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (7,756)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (3.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (3.12)
        

</TABLE>
# Office of the General Council

- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Friday, March 26, 2021 - 2:07pm
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Thursday, November 19, 2015 - 8:15am
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Wednesday, November 4, 2015 - 10:50am
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Wednesday, November 4, 2015 - 10:48am
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Monday, October 26, 2015 - 11:18am
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Monday, October 26, 2015 - 11:16am
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Monday, October 26, 2015 - 11:16am
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Monday, October 26, 2015 - 11:14am
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Tuesday, September 22, 2015 - 10:32am
- Office of the General Counsel (OGC) - Content Updated Tuesday, September 22, 2015 - 10:31am
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 97-3386EM

_____________

Richard P. Hayden, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Eastern

* District of Missouri.

Steve Palmer, Officer; Unknown *

Gregory, Captain; Unknown Cooksey, * [UNPUBLISHED]

Officer, *

*

Appellees. *

_____________

 Submitted: August 4, 1998

Filed: August 11, 1998

_____________

Before FAGG, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Richard P. Hayden appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary

judgment in Hayden's civil rights lawsuit. After careful review of the record and the

parties' briefs, we conclude the court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hayden

appointed counsel. We also conclude the district court correctly granted summary

judgment relief and further discussion is not warranted. We affirm. See 8th Cir. R.

47B.
-2-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
No. 48484.

#### Protests 42820-K, etc., of M. N. Blumenthal et al. (Los Angeles, etc.).

Opinion by

Cole, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
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

DAMON ALLGIRE, No. 2:04-cv-1680-MCE-GGH-P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

WARDEN R. A. CASTRO, ET AL., 

Defendants.

 /

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 March 29, 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 (20)

days. 

Case 2:04-cv-01680-MCE -GGH Document 26 Filed 06/30/06 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

Neither party has filed objections to the Findings and

Recommendations.

The Court has reviewed the file and finds the Findings and

Recommendations to be supported by the record and by the

magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed March 29, 2006,

are adopted in full; 

2. Defendants’ September 26, 2005, Motion to Dismiss is

granted; and

3. This action is dismissed.

DATED: June 29, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01680-MCE -GGH Document 26 Filed 06/30/06 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

MICHAEL B. WILSON,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0464 LKK GGH P

vs.

MARK IWASA, et al., ORDER

Defendants.

 /

On July 26, 2006, plaintiff was granted one final opportunity to file his second

amended complaint. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a second

amended complaint or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

Accordingly, this action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110;

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

DATED: December 12, 2006.

Case 2:04-cv-00464-LKK -GGH Document 22 Filed 12/12/06 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-7436

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RONALD COLLINS,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at 

Beckley. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (5:18-cr-00068-1; 5:22-cv-00161)

Submitted: August 29, 2023 Decided: August 31, 2023

Before KING, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald Collins, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7436 Doc: 17 Filed: 08/31/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Ronald Collins, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Collins’ 28 U.S.C. § 2255

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). A certificate of appealability will not issue 

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment 

of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 580 U.S. 100, 115-17 

(2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 

134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Collins has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Collins’ 

motions for abeyance, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 

and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-7436 Doc: 17 Filed: 08/31/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
**EXHIBIT 23.3**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-151911 on Form S-3 of our report dated February 27, 2009 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of new accounting standards), relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Wisconsin Power and Light Company and subsidiaries, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Wisconsin Power and Light Company for the year ended December 31, 2008.

 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

February 27, 2009
<PAGE>
                                                                     EXHIBIT 32


SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

Richard M. Deneau, President and Chief Executive Officer and Darrin J.
Campbell, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Anchor Glass
Container Corporation, hereby certify that:

         1.       The quarterly report of the registrant on Form 10-Q/A for the
quarter ended June 30, 2003 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 quarterly report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the registrant as of the dates and for the periods expressed in
the quarterly report.


Date:  November 3, 2003


/s/ Richard M. Deneau
-----------------------------------------------------------
Name: Richard M. Deneau
Title:  President and Chief Executive Officer


/s/ Darrin J. Campbell
-----------------------------------------------------------
Name: Darrin J. Campbell
Title: Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
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

ROBERT PAUL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1589 DFL GGH P

vs.

T. GUZMAN, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On May 12, 2005, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate

judge’s order filed April 11, 2005, dismissing plaintiff’s claims challenging the indigent inmate

postage policy and the delay in the processing of his legal mail and granting plaintiff thirty days

to file a second amended complaint. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 72-303(f), a magistrate judge’s

orders shall be upheld unless “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” Upon review of the entire

file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge’s ruling was clearly

erroneous or contrary to law.

 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed April 11, 2005, is

affirmed;

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01589-DFL-GGH Document 20 Filed 06/24/05 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. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint is due thirty days from the date of this

order.

DATED: 6/23/2005

 /s/ David F. Levi 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

/paul1589.850

Case 2:04-cv-01589-DFL-GGH Document 20 Filed 06/24/05 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 on Form 10-K of Kansas City Power & Light Company (the "Company") for the annual period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), William H. Downey, as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Terry Bassham, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each 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 the best of his knowledge:

(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/ William H. Downey                                  
|------------ | -------------------------------------------------------
|Name:
Title: | William H. Downey
President and Chief Executive Officer
|Date:        | March 8, 2006                                          
|             |                                                        
|             | /s/ Terry Bassham                                      
|Name:
Title: | Terry Bassham
Chief Financial Officer                  
|Date:        | March 8, 2006                                          

This certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document. This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to liability under that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 except to the extent this Exhibit 32.2 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference in any such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, 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 Kansas City Power & Light Company and will be retained by Kansas City Power & Light Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Bureau of Labor Statistics

Series Id:

Series title:

Labor force status:

Type of data:

Age:

Years:

Year Qtr1 Qtr2 Qtr3 Qtr4 Annual

2011 8287

Not in labor force

Number in thousands

65 to 69 years

2011 to 2011

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Original Data Value

LNU05024938Q

Not Seasonally Adjusted

(Unadj) Not in Labor Force, 65-69 yrs.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Generated on: May 16, 2011 (02:10:07 PM)
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

MARK FREEMAN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0902 DFL PAN P

vs.

SCOTT KERNAN, 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 December 7, 2004, 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 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 that plaintiff lacks Article III standing to bring this claim because he has not

suffered an injury. See Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61, 112 S.Ct. 2130

Case 2:04-cv-00902-DFL-PAN Document 9 Filed 06/09/06 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

(1992) (holding that standing requires a plaintiff to state “an injury in fact” that is not

“hypothetical”). Plaintiff states in his objections that he seeks to have the rules violation report

removed from his records because it will prevent him from being paroled. However, he has not

had an adverse ruling from a parole board based upon the report and may never receive such a

ruling. To satisfy the requirements for standing on the claim that this rules violation report is

unfounded, plaintiff must wait until he is denied parole on this ground and then petition for writ

of habeas corpus. See Butterfield v. Bail, 120 F.3d 1023, 1024 (9th Cir. 1997) (holding that

prisoner could not bring an action under § 1983 to challenge improper parole hearing); Elliott v.

United States, 572 F.2d 238, 239 (9th Cir. 1978) (holding that challenge to improper denial of

parole should be brought as a petition for writ of habeas corpus).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed December 7, 2004, are VACATED;

and 

2. This action is DISMISSED for lack of standing.

DATED: 6/8/2006

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00902-DFL-PAN Document 9 Filed 06/09/06 Page 2 of 2