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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES SANFORD, 

CIV. S-04-1534-DFL-KJM 

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER RE DISPOSITION AFTER

 NOTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT

OFFICEMAX INC., dba

OFFICEMAX #227, 

Defendants. 

 /

The court has been advised by Scottlynn J. Hubbard, IV,

that this action has been settled. Therefore, it is not

necessary that the action remain upon the court's active

calendar. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 

1. That counsel file settlement/dismissal documents, in

accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 16-160, no later

than June 27, 2005, and,

Case 2:04-cv-01534-DFL -KJM Document 31 Filed 06/10/05 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

2. That all hearing dates previously set in this matter

are vacated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 6/9/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01534-DFL -KJM Document 31 Filed 06/10/05 Page 2 of 2
SEPNOVOCT22002 2003200492             captures             8 Sep 03 - 23 Nov           10CloseHelp
Research Programs

Division of Materials Sciences and       Engineering

The Division of Materials Sciences and Engineering       (DMSE) supports research programs at national laboratories, universities,       and other research institutions.  The following list contains program       summaries of research supported by DMSE at the following national       laboratories:      
-       Ames Laboratory [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Argonne National Laboratory         [Program         Summary-PDF file] 
-       Brookhaven National Laboratory         [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Idaho National Engineering and         Environmental Laboratory [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Lawrence Berkeley National         Laboratory [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Lawrence Livermore National         Laboratory [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Los Alamos National Laboratory         [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       National Renewable Energy         Laboratory [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Oak Ridge National Laboratory         [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Pacific Northwest National         Laboratory [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Sandia National Laboratories         [Program         Summary-PDF file]  
-       Stanford Synchrotron Radiation         Laboratory [Program         Summary-PDF file]  

In addition to the national laboratory program, DMSE also       supports a broad-based research "grant" program at universities and other       research institutions.  The Materials Research Laboratory at the       University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign houses the Division's largest       university grant program.  The entire Fiscal Year 1995 portfolio of       the former Division of Materials Sciences can be accessed through the       archived program summary book ( Grant       Program, Laboratory       Program, and Small       Business Innovation Research Program). More information about specific       topics of research, please consult the list of core research activities in       the DMSE       homepage.

[Research       Programs]  [Proposal       Submissions]  [Publications]        [Staff       Contacts] 

  [DMSE       Home]  [BES]        [Office       of Science]  [DOE]
(Reap. Dec. 10070)

#### Pistorino & Company, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 23007, etc.

(Decided August 22, 1961)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*William H. Orriclc, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Lawkence, Judge:

The proper value for dutiable purposes of certain rubber covering machines, type SO 80, forms the subject of the appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in the schedule attached to and made a part of this decision.

The parties hereto have stipulated and agreed that, as to said rubber covering machines, type SO 80, the price, at the time of exportation to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold or offered for sale in the principal markets of the country of exportation, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, plus, when not included in such price, the price of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other expenses incidental to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States, was the entered values in each of the appeals in issue.

Upon the agreed facts of record, I find and hold that export value, as that value is defined in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, 91 Treas. Dec. 295, T.D. 54165 (19 U.S.C. § 1401a(b)), is the proper basis of value for the rubber covering machines, type SO 80, covered by the appeals for a reappraisement in issue and that said value was the entered values in each case. As to all other merchandise, the appeals are dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
(Reap. Dec. 8177)

#### American Import Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 1002.

(Decided December 2, 1952)

*Philip Stein*for the plaintiff.

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

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court:

> 1. That the merchandise covered by the reappraisement appeal enumerated in the annexed Schedule, represented by the items marked *“A”*on the invoices and initialed C. E. C. by C. E. Clouse, consists of Toyo upper rubber soled shoes, similar in all material respects to the paper and cotton upper rubber soled footwear the subject of decision in *United States*vs. *Japan Import Co., Inc.,*2 Cust. Ct. 926, Reap. Dec. 4568.

> 2. That in the reappraisement appeal described herein, the prices on the dates of exportation at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Japan in the usual wholesale *500quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, *and*all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, were the values shown on the invoices covered by the entry subject of the appeal herein.

> 3. That there was no higher foreign value for said merchandise.

> 4. That at the time of exportation of the merchandise covered by said reap-praisement appeal, no like or similar articles were manufactured or produced in the United States, and hence, under the decision in Reap. Dec. 4568, the appraisement herein on the basis of American selling price under authority of the Presidential Proclamation published in T. D. 46158, was inapplicable to said merchandise.

> 5. That the record in Reap. Dec. 4568 may be incorporated into the record herein and that the above entitled reappraisement may be submitted on such combined record and this stipulation.

> 6. That as to all other merchandise not marked with the letter “A” and initialed by the examiner, the reappraisement appeal is abandoned.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise marked “A” on the invoice and initialed CEC by C. E. Clouse, and that such values were the invoice values.

The appeal having been abandoned insofar as it relates to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeal is hereby dismissed.

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL CEREMELLO,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1423 DFL PAN

vs.

CITY OF DIXON, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff’s motion to compel Roberta Lee to produce documents requested by

subpoena duces tecum came on regularly for hearing June 13, 2006. William C. Collier appeared

for plaintiff. Bruce A. Kilday appeared for defendant City of Dixon, et al. Ned Smock, Assistant

Federal Defender, appeared for subpoenant Roberta Lee. Upon review of the motion and the

documents in support and opposition, upon hearing from counsel, and good cause appearing

therefor, THE COURT FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

Counsel for Ms. Lee will be directed to Bates stamp the documents and provide

copies of the documents to Mr. Collier and Mr. Kilday. The court will issue no further orders at

this time concerning the subject matter of this hearing, but this ruling will be without prejudice to

the filing of a motion at a future date upon a greater showing.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s May 8, 2006 motion to compel is granted in part.

Case 2:04-cv-01423-JAM-EFB Document 43 Filed 06/14/06 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

2. Within ten days from the date of this order, Mr. Smock will Bates stamp the

documents and provide copies to Mr. Collier and Mr. Kilday. 

3. In all other respects, plaintiff’s motion is denied without prejudice.

DATED: June 13, 2006. 

/001; ceremello.oah2

Case 2:04-cv-01423-JAM-EFB Document 43 Filed 06/14/06 Page 2 of 2
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4351 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize certain poison control 

programs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 15, 2024 

Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Mr. TUBERVILLE, Mr. LUJA ́N, and Mr. ROMNEY) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize 

certain poison control programs. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Poison Control Centers 

5 Reauthorization Act of 2024’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF POISON CONTROL PRO7 GRAMS. 

8 (a) NATIONAL TOLL-FREE NUMBER AND OTHER

9 COMMUNICATION CAPABILITIES.—Section 1271(c) of the 

10 Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300d–71(c)) is 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4351 IS

1 amended by striking ‘‘fiscal years 2020 through 2024’’ 

2 and inserting ‘‘fiscal years 2025 through 2029’’. 

3 (b) PROMOTING POISON CONTROL CENTER UTILIZA4 TION.—Section 1272(c) of the Public Health Service Act 

5 (42 U.S.C. 300d–72(c)) is amended by striking ‘‘fiscal 

6 years 2020 through 2024’’ and inserting ‘‘fiscal years 

7 2025 through 2029’’. 

8 (c) POISON CONTROL CENTER GRANT PROGRAM.— 

9 Section 1273(g) of the Public Health Service Act (42 

10 U.S.C. 300d–73(g)) is amended by striking ‘‘fiscal years 

11 2020 through 2024’’ and inserting ‘‘fiscal years 2025 

12 through 2029’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 31.1

    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Thomas E. Mills, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of AMP Productions,
Ltd.;

2.     Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.     I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and I have:

a)     designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

b)     evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c)     presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5.     I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

a)     all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b)     any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6.     I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including
any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

August 11, 2010



By   /s/ Thomas Mills
     Thomas E. Mills
     President,  Chief  Executive  Officer,
     Chief  Financial  Officer,  and
     Principal Accounting Officer
EXHIBIT 31.1
                           SECTION 302 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Michael L. Sheriff, certify that:

         1. I have  reviewed  this annual  report on form 10-KSB of The X-Change
Corporation, Inc.,

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4. The small business  issuer's other certifying  officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining  disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in exchange act rules  13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the small business issuer and
have:

a) designed such disclosure  controls and procedures,  or caused such disclosure
controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to ensure that
material  information  relating  to the small  business  issuer,  including  its
consolidated subsidiaries,  is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)  evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  small  business  issuer's  disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our  conclusions  about the
effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the
period covered by this report on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business  issuer's  internal
control  over  financial  reporting  that  occurred  during  the small  business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business  issuer's  fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual  report) that has  materially  affected,  or is
reasonably  likely to materially  affect,  the small business  issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business  issuer's other certifying  officers and I have disclosed,
based  on  our  most  recent  evaluation  of  internal  control  over  financial
reporting,  to the small business  issuer's  auditors and the audit committee of
small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

a) all  significant  deficiencies  and  material  weaknesses  in the  design  or
operation of internal  control over  financial  reporting  which are  reasonably
likely to  adversely  affect  the small  business  issuer's  ability  to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant  role in the small business  issuer's  internal
control over financial reporting.

Date: April 19, 2006
/S/ Michael L. Sheriff
Micheal L. Sheriff
C.E.O., President, Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




**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 March 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:
                October
                16, 2006
            By:
            */s/
              Jay P. Nash*Name:Jay
                P. NashTitle:Chief
                Financial 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.
### ZUCKERT SCOUTT

RASENBERGER 888Sc\'cnrccnth Street,N\V,Suite700 \'\\t,hington, DC 20006.3309

December 19, 2014 YIA REGULATIONS. GOY AND EMAIL Docket Management Facility West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, D.C. 20590 Attn: DOT-OST-1998-3304 Michael Crook Coordinator, Transportation Disaster Operations Transportation Disaster Assistance Division National Transportation Safety Board 490 L'Enfant Plaza East, SW Washington, D.C. 20594 michael.crook@ntsb.gov

Re: Alitalia

- Societa Aerea Italiana S.p.A. Aviation Disaster Family Assistance Plan Ladies and Gentlemen: Effective January 1,2015, Alitalia

- Societa Aerea ltaliana S.p.A. ("Alitalia SAl") will succeed Alitalia

- Compagnia Aerea Italiana S.p.A. 's ("Alitalia CAl") with respect tothe latter's airtransport services. By means of this letter, Alitalia SAl hereby provides notification that it shall adopt the Aviation Disaster Family Assistance Plan ofAlitalia CAl, on file with both the Department ofTransportation andNational TranspOltation Safety Board ("NTSB"). The emergency contact information provided to the NTSB 011 April 3, 2014 remains unchanged. Please do not hesitate to contact any ofthe undersigned at: should you have any questions. Respectfully submitted,

Jonathon H. Foglia Richard D. Mathias David M. Endersbee COlll1selto ALITALIA

- SOCIET

## A AEREA ITALIANA S.P.A.

Zuckerl. Scautt & Rascnbergcr. 'L.L.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

JESSE SIMPKINS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1433 DFL PAN P

vs.

FOOTHILL ORTHOPEDIC, 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 March 16, 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 fourteen days. 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:

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01433-DFL-PAN Document 56 Filed 05/19/06 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

1. The findings and recommendations filed March 16, 2006 are adopted in full;

and 

2. Plaintiff’s claims against defendant Sydenstricker are dismissed without

prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 4(m).

DATED: 5/18/2006

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01433-DFL-PAN Document 56 Filed 05/19/06 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

RICARDO LOPEZ,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-1598 GEB GGH P

vs.

SCOTT KERNAN, et al., 

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has

timely filed a notice of appeal of this court's May 5, 2005,

denial of his application for a writ of habeas corpus. Before

petitioner can appeal this decision, a certificate of

appealability must issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P.

22(b).

A certificate of appealability may issue under 28

U.S.C. § 2253 “only if the applicant has made a substantial

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

§ 2253(c)(2). The certificate of appealability must “indicate

Case 2:04-cv-01598-GEB-GGH Document 13 Filed 06/21/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1 Except for the requirement that appealable issues be

specifically identified, the standard for issuance of a

certificate of appealability is the same as the standard that

applied to issuance of a certificate of probable cause. 

Jennings, at 1010.

2

which specific issue or issues satisfy” the requirement. 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3).

A certificate of appealability should be granted for

any issue that petitioner can demonstrate is “‘debatable among

jurists of reason,’” could be resolved differently by a different

court, or is “‘adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed

further.’” Jennings v. Woodford, 290 F.3d 1006, 1010 (9th Cir.

2002) (quoting Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 (1983)).1

Petitioner has made a substantial showing of the denial

of a constitutional right in the following issue presented in the

instant petition: Whether there was sufficient evidence to find

petitioner unsuitable for parole. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a certificate of

appealability is issued in the present action.

Dated: June 20, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01598-GEB-GGH Document 13 Filed 06/21/05 Page 2 of 2