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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

WORDTECH SYSTEMS, INC., a

California corporation,

No. 2:04-cv-1971-MCE-PAN

Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

INTEGRATED NETWORK SOLUTIONS,

INC., a Nevada corporation,

dba INTEGRATED NETWORK

SOLUTIONS, CORP. aka

INTEGRATED NETWORK SOLUTIONS

aka INTEGRATED SYSTEMS aka

INTEGRATED NETWORK STORAGE

COMPANY aka INSC; NASSER

KHATEMI, an individual; HAMID

ASSADIAN, an individual;

EHTERAM GHODSIAN, an

individual; SHOHREH JAVADI, an

individual; MICHAEL F.

ELLSWORTH, an individual;

BRIAN J. DEAN, an individual;

SAN JUAN UNIFIED SCHOOL

DISTRICT; and DOES 1-50,

Defendants.

----oo0oo----

Plaintiff Wordtech Systems, Inc. (“Wordtech”) has filed a

Motion to Extend Discovery Cut-off in this matter, which is

Case 2:04-cv-01971-TLN-EFB Document 70 Filed 01/11/06 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

Because oral argument would not be of material assistance, 1

this matter was deemed suitable for decision without oral

argument. E.D. Local Rule 78-230(h).

2

currently set to expire on January 20, 2006. According to

Wordtech, the Integrated Network Solutions Defendants, which

include both Integrated Networks and Defendants Khatemi and

Assadian (hereinafter “INSC Defendants”), have failed to respond

to previous discovery efforts in a forthcoming manner, thereby

necessitating an extension in order to complete the discovery

process. No previous extension of the discovery cut-off has been

sought.

The INSC Defendants, in response, indicate that they do not

oppose an extension of discovery by at least sixty (60) days,

stating that Wordtech has also failed to fully cooperate with

their discovery requests. In addition, Co-Defendant and CrossClaimant San Juan Unified School District has filed a joinder to

Wordtech’s continuance request on grounds that additional time to

complete discovery is indeed necessary.

Given the non-opposition to Wordtech’s request, and good

cause appearing therefor, the Motion to Extend Discovery is

GRANTED. Discovery shall be completed not later than March 20, 1

2006. Consistent with that extension, the deadlines for expert

designation and the hearing of dispositive motions are also

continued to May 19, 2006 and June 19, 2006, respectively. The

August 14, 2006 date for the Final Pretrial Conference, as well

as the September 20, 2006 trial date, remain unchanged pursuant

//

//

Case 2:04-cv-01971-TLN-EFB Document 70 Filed 01/11/06 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

3

to the Court’s Amended Pretrial (Status) Scheduling Order of July

15, 2005. No further extensions will be granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 10, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01971-TLN-EFB Document 70 Filed 01/11/06 Page 3 of 3
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Jay Darden Loving

, * From the County Court at Law No. 2

of Taylor County,

Trial Court No. 2

- 958

- 17

.

Vs. No. 11

- 1 8

- 00 325

- CR * November 30 , 20 20

The State of Texas

, * Opinion by Bailey , C.J.

(P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Stretcher , J. , and Wright, S.C.J.,

sitting by assignment )

( Willson , J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion,

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Richard L. Alley,

Petitioner, No. Civ. S 04-1934 MCE PAN P

vs. Order

Tom L. Carey, et al.,

Respondents.

-oOoSeptember 16, 2004, petitioner filed a petition for a writ

of habeas corpus challenging the procedures used in a

disciplinary proceeding. June 24, 2005, petitioner filed a

habeas petition challenging the decision finding him unsuitable

for parole. Despite the new challenge, the June 24, 2005,

petition was designated an “amended petition” in this case.

Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed to remove

the June 24, 2005, petition from this file and to open a new case

file for it.

Case 2:04-cv-01934-MCE -PAN Document 14 Filed 08/18/05 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

So ordered.

Dated: August 17, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

alle1934.new case.

Case 2:04-cv-01934-MCE -PAN Document 14 Filed 08/18/05 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-5027

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DAVID A. WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (3:03-cr-00120) Submitted: October 17, 2006 Decided: October 19, 2006 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. J. Lloyd Snook, III, SNOOK & HAUGHEY, P.C., Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellant. John L. Brownlee, United States Attorney, Donald R. Wolthuis, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: A jury convicted David A. Williams of possession of a firearm by a previously convicted felon, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2000). The district court sentenced Williams to sixty-three months’ imprisonment under the then-mandatory sentencing guidelines. The sentencing court also imposed an identical alternative sentence, pursuant to United States v. Hammoud , 378 F.3d 426 (4th Cir.) (order), opinion issued by381 F.3d 316 (4th Cir. 2004) (en banc), vacated , 543 U.S. 1097 (2005), on remand , 405 F.3d 1034 (4th Cir. 2005). Williams appeals, contending his sentence violated United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005). The Sixth Amendment error in this case, if any, was harmless because the district court imposed an identical alternative sentence in accordance with Hammoud . See United States v. Shatley , 448 F.3d 264, 267 (4th Cir. 2006). The district court’s alternative sentence was within the range recommended by the sentencing guidelines, and this court takes the district court at its word when it states it would impose the same sentence under the advisory guideline system. Seeid. at 267-68. Therefore, we presume the district court properly considered the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2005), as required by United States v. Hughes , 401 F.3d 540, 546-56 (4th Cir. 2005); United States v. Green , 436 F.3d 449 (4th Cir.)- 3 - cert. denied , 126 S. Ct. 2309 (2006); and United States v. Moreland , 437 F.3d 424 (4th Cir. 2006). Shatley , 448 F.3d at 268. Accordingly, we affirm Williams’ sentence. 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.

AFFIRMED
No. 48503.

#### Protest 965612-G of Chong Sing Co. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as that involved in *Wing Duck Co.*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 133, C. D. 446). In accordance therewith it was held not subject to internal revenue tax and the protest was sustained.
No. 52581.

protests 1737-K, etc. (New York).

#### Allied Purchasing Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

*211Opinion by

Rao, J.

Following the .authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
KANSAS CITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


Year Ended 2014




The undersigned certify that the registrant’s Form 10-K report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.


/s/ R. Philip BixbyR. Philip BixbyPresident, Chief Executive Officer,and Chairman of the Board


/s/ Tracy W. KnappTracy W. KnappSenior Vice President, FinanceDate:March 6, 2015
No. 49163.

#### Protest 92311-K of John Zimmermann Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The testimony showed that certain items consist of hats similar to those involved m Abstract 46497, which record was admitted in evidence herein. In accordance therewith the items in question were held dutiable at 25 percent under paragraph 1504 (b) (1) as claimed.
No. 56365.

protest 148763-K (Los Angeles).

#### F. H. Hendricks *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

The motion to dismiss was denied. From an examination of the papers, however, the court was unable to find anything sufficient to disturb the action of the collector, which was presumptively correct. The protest was therefore overruled.
EXHIBIT 99.1
                                CEO CERTIFICATION




                            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 Annual Report of The X-Change  Corporation on Form 10-KSB
for the period  ending  December  31,  2002,  as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I,  Jeff  Troncone,
President  of the  Company,  certify,  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 my knowledge and belief:

         (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 result of
                  operations of the Company.


April 14, 2003

By: /s/ Jeff Troncone
Jeff Troncone
President and Chief  Executive Officer
(Principal Executive and 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

WILLIAM JACKSON KITCHENS,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1206 MCE PAN P

vs.

PAT HOUGE, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis seeking relief

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On April 27, 2005, the court ordered the United States Marshal to serve process

on defendants. On July 1, 2005, process directed to defendant Ben Parsi was returned unserved

because there was “no defendant by this name on the CDC roster." 

On November 9, 2005, the court directed plaintiff to submit additional

information to enable service of process on this defendant and on December 2, 2005, plaintiff

complied. On December 8, 2005 the court directed the Marshal to serve this defendant but on

January 25, 2006, the Marshal returned process unserved because “per CDC locator, no info on

defendant.”

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01206-MCE -EFB Document 43 Filed 03/08/06 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

Absent good cause, service of process must be effected within 120 days of the

filing of the complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). 

Plaintiff has been attempting to locate defendant Parsi for nearly one year.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff has 45 days from the date of this order to explain in writing why his

claims against defendant Parsi should not be dismissed without prejudice. Failure to comply

with this order will result in a recommendation that claims against this defendant be dismissed

without prejudice.

DATED: March 7, 2006.

\004

\kitc1206.osc rule 4m

Case 2:04-cv-01206-MCE -EFB Document 43 Filed 03/08/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 47882.

#### Protest 89757-K of P. H. Petry Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

When the case was called for trial there was no appearance on the part of the plaintiff. There being nothing in the record to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s classification, the protest was overruled.
### Request for Information Ron Greenber g Video and Photo (FAA-2015-2942) 9-AWA-AVS-333Exemptions (FAA)

Dear Mr. Greenberg: This letter is to inform you that the following information is miss ing from your petition (Docket No. FAA

− 2015

− 2942). This information is necessary for the Fe deral Aviation Administrati on (FAA) to process your p etition.

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Op erations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to proceed without this manual and remove closed

- set filming from your proposed operati on please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.
Please submit the additional information (non- proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov . Once your information has been submitted, pl ease also send a copy of the requested information (and any proprietary information), as well as your comment tracking number from regulations .gov via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov. I f you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information de scribed above by November 19, 2015. If we do not receive the in formation, we will close the doc ket without notifying you further. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-2999 .

FAA Office of Rulemaking Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 1:55 PM To: videoserv2@aol.com
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4603 

To authorize the appropriation of amounts for the construction of a dining 

hall and services training facility at Savannah Air National Guard Base, 

Georgia. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 20, 2024 

Mr. OSSOFF introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To authorize the appropriation of amounts for the construction of a dining hall and services training facility at 

Savannah Air National Guard Base, Georgia. 

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 ‘‘Savannah CRTC Din5 ing Hall Construction Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4603 IS

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF AMOUNTS FOR CONSTRUCTION 

2 OF A DINING HALL AND SERVICES TRAINING 

3 FACILITY AT SAVANNAH AIR NATIONAL 

4 GUARD BASE, GEORGIA. 

5 There is authorized to be appropriated to the Sec6 retary of Defense for fiscal year 2025 $27,000,000 for the 

7 construction of a dining hall and services training facility 

8 at Savannah Air National Guard Base, Georgia. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
# EUR-Lex - 52007BP0120(01) - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52007BP0120(01)

**1. European Parliament decision of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005 (C6-0394/2006 - 2006/2161(DEC)) **

*
Official Journal 074 E , 20/03/2008 P. 0227 - 0227 *

1.

European Parliament decision of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005 (C6-0394/2006 — 2006/2161(DEC))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005 [1],

- having regard to the Court of Auditors' report on the final annual accounts of the European Medicines Agency for the financial year 2005, together with the Agency's replies [2],

- having regard to the Council's recommendation of 27 February 2007 (5711/2007 — C6-0080/2007),

- having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,

- having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities [3], and in particular Article 185 thereof,

- having regard to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency [4], and in particular Article 68 thereof,

- having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 [5], and in particular Article 94 thereof,

- having regard to Rule 71 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the Report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A6-0099/2007),

1. Grants the executive director of the European Medicines Agency discharge for the implementation of the Agency's budget for the financial year 2005;

2. Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3. Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the executive director of the European Medicines Agency, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

[1] OJ C 266, 31.10.2006, p. 4.

[2] OJ C 312, 19.12.2006, p. 12.

[3] OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 (OJ L 390, 30.12.2006, p. 1).

[4] OJ L 136, 30.4.2004, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 (OJ L 378, 27.12.2006, p. 1).

[5] OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

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

Stip. & Order Re Scheduling

AJ KUTCHINS

PO Box 5138

Berkeley, California 94705

(510) 841-5635

State Bar No. 102322

Attorney for Petitioner

ANSAR EL MUHAMMAD

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

ANSAR EL MUHAMMAD, also known as 

CHEVAL WRIGHT,

Petitioner,

vs. NO. CIV S-04-1856 FCD JFM P

JEANNE WOODFORD, Director, 

California Department of Corrections;

JOSEPH L. McGRATH, Warden,

Respondents.

 /

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING SCHEDULING

The parties to the above-captioned action hereby stipulate that Petitioner Ansár El

Muhammad shall have until October 18, 2006, to file his Traverse. 

Dated: September13, 2006 __________/s/________________

AJ KUTCHINS

Attorney for Petitioner

Dated: September 14, 2006 _________/s/_________________

DAVID LOWE

Deputy Attorney General

Attorney for the Respondents

Case 2:04-cv-01856-JAM-JFM Document 33 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

27

28

Stip. & Order Re Scheduling 2

ORDER

Good cause appearing therefor, it is hereby ordered that the time for filing the

Traverse in this case shall be, and hereby is, extended to October 18, 2006.

Dated: September 21, 2006.

/muha1856.ext3

Case 2:04-cv-01856-JAM-JFM Document 33 Filed 09/22/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 63052.

#### Wm. A. Hausman Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 192632-K, etc. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fresh or frozen boneless pork similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstract 59714, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4543 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4543

 To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to allow States to waive 
certain administrative requirements for recertification, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 13, 2024

Mr. Welch (for himself and Mr. Padilla) introduced the following bill; 
  which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, 
                        Nutrition, and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to allow States to waive 
certain administrative requirements for recertification, and for other 
                               purposes.

    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 ``SNAP Recertification Reform Act of 
2024''.

SEC. 2. WAIVER OF CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR 
              RECERTIFICATION UNDER SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE 
              PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Section 11(e)(6) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 
2008 (7 U.S.C. 2020(e)(6)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' at the end; 
        and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(C) the State agency may waive recertification 
                interviews required by the Secretary subject to the 
                condition that the applicant--
                            ``(i) waives the interview; and
                            ``(ii) has already demonstrated eligibility 
                        for the continuation of benefits; and
                    ``(D) if the Secretary requires an applicant 
                interview for recertification, the State agency shall 
                give the applicant the option to conduct the interview 
                in-person, by phone, virtually, or through any other 
                medium determined by the Secretary to reduce 
                administrative burden;''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```