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

JEFFREY J. BIGGS,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-1133 GEB CMK P

vs.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has

filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. 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 April 28, 2005, 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 fifteen 

Case 2:04-cv-01133-GEB-CMK Document 24 Filed 05/19/05 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

days. Petitioner 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.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed April 28,

2005, are adopted in full;

2. Respondents’ motion to dismiss filed February 3,

2005, is granted; and

3. This action is entirely dismissed.

Dated: May 18, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01133-GEB-CMK Document 24 Filed 05/19/05 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

 Plaintiff was advised that because he did not file an application requesting leave to

proceed in forma pauperis, service was not effected by the U.S. Marshal pursuant to Rule 4(c)(2).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFFREY A. PATE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1201 FCD DAD P

vs.

SACRAMENTO COUNTY

SHERIFF’S DEPUTIES, 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §

1983. Plaintiff has paid the filing fee. On November 15, 2005, the court ordered plaintiff to

submit proof that service was completed on defendant Garcia.1 On December 9, 2005, plaintiff

filed a letter to the court indicating that because of his physical and psychiatric disabilities, he has

had difficulty responding to the court’s orders. On December 12, 2005, plaintiff filed a second

letter and stated that his response was sent to the court on December 7, 2005. Neither letter,

however, provides any information regarding whether plaintiff has successfully completed

service on defendant Garcia. The court will order plaintiff to submit proof of service with

Case 2:04-cv-01201-FCD-DAD Document 26 Filed 01/05/06 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

respect to defendant Garcia. Alternatively, if service has not been accomplished, plaintiff may

file an application requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis. If the application is granted,

the court will order service by the U.S. Marshal.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within fifteen days from the service of this order, plaintiff shall file his proof

of service for defendant Garcia or an application requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis; 

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to provide plaintiff with an application

requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis by a prisoner; and

3. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed. 

DATED: January 5, 2006.

DAD:4

pate1201.pos

Case 2:04-cv-01201-FCD-DAD Document 26 Filed 01/05/06 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 32.2**

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

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of EnerNOC, Inc. (the “Company”), for the quarterended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Neal C. Isaacson, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 1350of Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, that:

(1)The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:August 10, 2007
|   | By:    | /s/ Neal C. Isaacson |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Neal C. Isaacson          |
|   |   | Chief Financial Officer   |

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to EnerNOC,Inc. and will be retained by EnerNOC, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

----
No. 51418.

#### Protest 98781-K of R. C. Williams & Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Somerset*(33 C. C. P. A. 138, C. A. D. 328) and that a quantity of liquor amounting to 10 percent or more of the total contents of the various barrels, casks, packages, etc., was lost in transit from the port of exportation to the port of destination, due to breakage, leakage, or damage. In accordance therewith it was held that an allowance should have been made for the loss appearing upon the gauger’s return as verified by the affidavit of the importer. The protest was sustained to this extent.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996             JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0                  14,277
<SECURITIES>                                         0                  17,231
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0                  99,310
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                 136,040
<PP&E>                                               0                  30,079
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                  18,678
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0                 204,457
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                  20,386
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                   1,669
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0                 204,457
<SALES>                                        113,075                 218,836
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0                       0
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  102,272                 199,047
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   144                     289
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 117                     213
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,109                  20,385
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,666                   8,562
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0                       0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,443                  11,823
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10                     .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10                     .18


</TABLE>
No. 6467.

#### NATIONAL SURETY COMPANY vs. CRESCENT CITY MANUFACTURING COMPANY.

Syllabus.

A party has a right to recover the amount which he has paid under a judgment which has been subsequently reversed on appeal.

An appellee is entitled to damages for a frivolous appeal.

Appeal.from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, Division “A,” No. 108,596. Honorable T. C. W. Ellis, Judge.

Grant & Grant, for plaintiff and appellee.

Denechaud & Rossi, for defendant and appellant.

His Honor, 'CHARLES F. CLAIBORNE,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:

This is a suit for the reimbursement of a sum of money-paid by plaintiff to defendant in execution of a judgment rendered by the District Court and subsequently reversed by the Supreme Court.

The plaintiff alleges that in the case of George Rohm vs. Peter J. Jallans, and the National Surety Company and others, No. 98,777 of the Civil District Court, judg*77ment was rendered in favor of the Crescent City Manufacturing Company, defendant herein, for $352.10, which petitioner paid to avoid a seizure; that petitioner took a devolutive appeal from said judgment to the Supreme Court which reversed said judgment; See 134 La., 913; that the said Crescent City Manufacturing Company should now reimburse to petitioner said sum of $352.10 with interest and- costs.

Opinion and decree, November 22nd, 1915.

For opinion on motion to dismiss see Book XII, p. 420.

The Crescent City Manufacturing Company denied .the righf of the plaintiff to recover the amount claimed.

There was judgment for plaintiff and defendant has appealed.

We see no defense to the suit. Article 2301 (2279) Civil Code provides that “he who receives what is not due to him obliges himself to restore it to him from whom he has unduly received it.” In the case of Mooney vs. Corcoran, 15 La., 46, the Supreme Court held that a party had a right to recover back an amount which he had paid under .a- judgment rendered against him by the District Court and which was .afterwards reversed on appeal-The plaintiff has prayed for damages and we think he is entitled to them.

It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from be affirmed with ten per cent on the amount thereof ■as damages for a frivolous .appeal.

Judgment affirmed, with damages.
(Reap. Dec. 9492)

#### Morris Friedman et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 4492, etc.

(Decided August 19, 1959)

*Tompkins & Tompkins*for the plaintiffs.

*George Cochran Douh,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” hereto attached and made a part hereof, are before me for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between counsel for the Plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, Defendant, subject to the approval of the Court, that the issues in the Reappraisement Appeals set forth in Schedule A below, which Schedule A is made a part of this stipulation, are the same in all material respects as the issues in the case of *United States v. Freedman & Slater, Inc.,*A.R.D. 77, and that the record in said A.R.D. 77 may be incorporated in the cases listed in said Schedule A.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that the entered values of the merchandise involved in the cases listed in said Schedule A are equal to the prices at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such and similar merchandise was being freely offered for sale in the usual wholesale quantities to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, packed ready for delivery, and that the “foreign values” of such and similar merchandise, as defined in Section 402(c) Tariff Act of 1930, were no higher.

> The eases listed in said Schedule A are submitted for decision upon this stipulation.

*480On. the agreed facts and following the cited decision on the law, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is export value, as defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, and hold that such statutory value for these items is, in each instance, the entered value.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
# C_2008044EN.01003302.xml

| 16.2.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 44/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 44/33

---

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on rear registration plate lamps for motor vehicles and their trailers’ (Codified version)

COM(2007) 451 final — 2007/0162 (COD)

(2008/C 44/08)

On 5 September 2007 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposal.

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the proposal and feels that it requires no comment on its part, it decided, at its 439th plenary session of 24 and 25 October 2007 (meeting of 24 October), by 144 votes to 1 with 7 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 24 October 2007.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

---
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

MARK PAYNE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1585 MCE KJM P

vs.

MULE CREEK STATE PRISON,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

On May 5, 2005, the court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint and gave him thirty

days in which to file a second amended complaint.

On May 31, 2005, plaintiff filed a request for an extension of time in which to file

his pretrial statement and motions to secure the attendance of witnesses. However, the court has

not issued any scheduling order or otherwise set a trial date or a deadline for plaintiff’s pretrial

statement. The court will treat this request as one for an extension of time to file a second

amended complaint pursuant to the court’s order of May 5, 2005. 

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01585-MCE -KJM Document 10 Filed 06/07/05 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

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s May 31, 2005 request for an extension of time is granted; and

2. Plaintiff shall file a second amended complaint on or before July 5, 2005.

DATED: June 6, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2/kf

payn1585.36

Case 2:04-cv-01585-MCE -KJM Document 10 Filed 06/07/05 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

MITCHELL J. KLEMASKE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1750 FCD KJM P

vs.

MICHAEL BRUNELL,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

On April 19, 2005, defendants filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 12(b). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. 

Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file

written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any

opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .” On February 9, 2005, plaintiff was advised of the

requirements for filing an opposition to the motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may

be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. 

Local Rule 11-110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be

grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the

inherent power of the Court.” In the order filed February 9, 2005, plaintiff was advised 

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01750-LKK-JFM Document 11 Filed 05/26/05 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

that failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be

dismissed.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days of the

date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any he has, to the motion to dismiss or a

statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

DATED: May 25, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

/kf

klem1750.46o

Case 2:04-cv-01750-LKK-JFM Document 11 Filed 05/26/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 50975.

#### Protests 42803-K, etc., of Davey’s et al. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the court found that the facts herein agreed upon were such as to bring the case within the holding in *John Barr*v. *United States*(11 Cust. Ct. 88, C. D. 801), which record was incorporated heroin. (See *John Barr*v. *United States,*324 U. S. 83, decided February 5, 1945.) In accordance therewith it was held that the currency of the invoices should be converted at the buying rate in the New York market at noon on the day of exportation (the “free” rate of exchange for pounds sterling), as certified by the Federal Reserve bank and set forth by the collector on each of the entries involved. The protests were sustained to this extent.
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

EDWARD ONTIVERAS, No. CIV S-04-1141-GEB-CMK-P

Petitioner, 

vs. ORDER

DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS, 

et al.,

Respondents.

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Given the complexity of the issues raised in this case, the court appointed the

Federal Public Defender to represent petitioner and directed the parties to submit status reports

within 60 days. The purpose of the status reports was to elicit from the parties their thoughts on

proceeding with this case in light of the pendency of an appeal in Sass v. California Board of

Prison Terms, 376 F. Supp. 2d 975 (E.D. Cal. 2005), in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Because the Ninth Circuit decided Sass on August 31, 2006, there is no longer a need for status

reports. The parties will, therefore, be relieved of the obligation to submit status reports.

Case 2:04-cv-01141-GEB-CMK Document 20 Filed 09/06/06 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

Instead, and because of the recent appointment of counsel to represent petitioner,

the court will provide petitioner, though appointed counsel, the opportunity to file a

supplemental memorandum of points and authorities addressing the merits of the claims raised in

the petition. Respondents will be given an opportunity to file a supplemental answer and

petitioner may file a supplemental traverse. Upon completion of supplemental briefing, or upon

the expiration of the time to file a supplemental memorandum of points and authorities in

support of the petition if none is filed, this case will stand submitted for a decision on the merits. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The parties are relieved of the obligation to file status reports;

2. Within 30 days of the date of this order, petitioner, through appointed

counsel, may file a supplemental memorandum of points and authorities addressing the merits of

the claims raised in this petition;

3. Respondents may file a supplemental answer within 30 days from the

date of service of any supplemental memorandum of points and authorities in support of the

petition; and

4. Petitioner may file a supplemental traverse within 30 days of service of

respondents’ supplemental answer.

DATED: September 5, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01141-GEB-CMK Document 20 Filed 09/06/06 Page 2 of 2
(Reap. Dec. 10731)

#### H. Zwart & Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 124.

(Decided April 28, 1964)

*Sharp & Bogan*for the plaintiff.

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

Olivek, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been limited, under the terms of a stipulation of submission, to certain hardboard, manufactured in France and exported to the United States by the Societe Francaise pour le Commerce Exterieur de Panneaux (EX-PANO), and which is “described on the invoices as Isogil hardboard D-3.” As to all other merchandise included on the invoice covered by the entry involved herein, the appeal for reappraisement has been abandoned.

Stipulated facts, upon which the case is before me, establish that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question, as hereinabove identified, is foreign value, as defined in section 402a (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and that such statutory value therefor is 3.31 nouveau francs per square meter, less 31 per centum, less 1 per centum, less 1 *y2*per centum, less 20 per centum, plus packing.

As to all other merchandise included on the invoice covered by the entry involved herein, the appeal for reappraisement is dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.