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

JOHN FRASHER,

Petitioner, 2:04-cv-1666-GEB-DAD-P

vs.

TOM CAREY, Warden, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has

filed an 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 July 26, 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 twenty days. 

Case 2:04-cv-01666-GEB-DAD Document 9 Filed 08/30/05 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

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 July 26,

2005, are adopted in full; 

2. Respondents’ October 7, 2004 motion to dismiss is

granted; and

3. This action is dismissed with prejudice because the

application for a writ of habeas corpus was filed beyond the oneyear statute of limitations.

Dated: August 29, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01666-GEB-DAD Document 9 Filed 08/30/05 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32
 Certifications Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  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 Corporate Property Associates 16  Global
Incorporated.
  /s/ Trevor P. Bond

Trevor P. Bond 
Chief Executive OfficerDate 11/122010/s/ Mark J. DeCesaris

Mark J. DeCesaris 
Chief Financial 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**

|  | ·  | the                    Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June                    30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission                    on the date                    hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section                    13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--|--------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | ·  | the                    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                    respects, the financial condition and result of operations of                    the Company                    for the periods presented therein. |
|--|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                                                                                                                                 |                                                    |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                 | /s/ Samuel              F.              Occhipinti |
|   | Samuel                F. Occhipinti Chief                Financial Officer (principal                financial and accounting officer)August                13, 2008 |

----
(Reap. Dec. 9498)

#### Henry A. Wess, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 201.

(Decided August 26, 1959)

*Tompkins & Tompkins (Allerton deC. Tonvpkins*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doiib,*Assistant Attorney General *(Mollie Strum,*trial attorney), for the defendant.

LawRence, Judge:

The proper value for dutiable purposes of certain pocketkniyes exported from Germany is before the court for determination.

When this case was called for hearing, the parties hereto entered into an oral stipulation of fact wherein it was agreed that the market value or the price, at the time of exportation of the instant merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported, Solingen, Germany, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, was $11.70 per dozen, less *33y3*per centum, plus boxes at United States $0.35 per dozen, less 2 per centum discount, packed. It was further stipulated and agreed that there was *485no higher foreign value for such or similar merchandise at the time of exportation.

Upon the record before the court, I find and hold that export value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1402(d)), is the proper basis for determining the value of the pocketknives in controversy and that said value is $11.70 per dozen, less 33% per centum, plus boxes at United States $0.35 per dozen, less 2 per centum discount, packed. As to all other merchandise, the appeal is dismissed.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
(Reap. Dec. 8668)

Entry No. W-75311.

#### N. Y. Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided October 10, 1956)

*Siegel Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

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

Mollison, Judge:

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

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the export value of the merchandise at the time of exportation to the United States covered by the Appeal to Reappraisement enumerated above, with the exception of the metal double bicycle horns contained in case T 4322, at which time such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for export to the United States including costs of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise ready for shipment to the United States was the appraised value less additions made to meet the advances by the Appraiser in similar eases covering the non-dutiable so-called (F. O. B.) charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage, hauling and lighterage added by the importer on entry.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher foreign value for merchandise such or similar to the merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeal to Reap-praisement enumerated above may be submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

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 here involved, except the metal double bicycle horns contained in case T 4322, and that such values were the appraised values, less additions made to meet the advances by the appraiser in similar cases covering the non-dutiable so-called (f. o. b.) charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage, hauling, and lighterage, added by the importer on entry.

Insofar as the appeal relates to the metal double bicycle horns contained in case T 4322, it is hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Order entered September 9, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00534-CV

ASSOCIATION OF TAXICAB OPERATORS, USA, ET AL., Appellants

V.

WALAAL CORPORATION D/B/A AMBASSADOR CAB, Appellees

On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-14-03638

ORDER

The clerk’s and reporter’s records are overdue. By order dated August 2, 2016, we 

instructed the Dallas County District Clerk, to file, within twenty days, either the clerk’s record 

or written verification that appellants have not paid or made arrangements to pay the clerk’s fee. 

On August 4, 2016, the District Clerk provided written verification that appellants have not paid 

the fee for preparation of the record. On September 6, 2016, the Court received “Appellants’ 

Supplemental Report on Status of Payment for Clerk’s Record.” Appellants inform the Court 

that they have reached a payment plan with the District Clerk’s office. Pursuant to the payment 

plan, appellants will make an initial payment of $765 and payments of $255 in each of the next 

three months. We construe this document as a motion for an extension of time to file the clerk’s 

record. We GRANT the motion to the extent that we extend the time to file the clerk’s record 
to DECEMBER 9, 2016. We caution appellants that if the clerk’s record is not filed by 

DECEMBER 9, 2016, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution without further 

notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b).

In the same August 2, 2016 order, we ordered Vielica Dobbins, Official Court Reporter 

for the 134th Judicial District Court, to file, within twenty days, either the reporter’s record, 

written verification that no hearings were recorded, or written verification that appellants have 

not paid or made arrangements to pay for the reporter’s record. As of today’s date, neither the 

reporter’s record nor either of the requested written verifications has been filed. 

We again ORDER Ms. Dobbins to file, WITHIN TEN DAYS of the date of this order, 

either (1) the reporter’s record, (2) written verification that no hearings were recorded, (3) 

written verification that appellants have not requested preparation of the reporter’s record, or (4) 

written verification that appellants have not paid or made arrangements to pay for the reporter’s 

record. We caution appellants that if we receive written verification that no hearings were 

recorded or written verification of no request or no payment, we will order the appeal submitted 

without the reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c).

We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. Pitre, Ms. 

Dobbins, and counsel for all parties.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
June 19, 1940

No. 44025.

Suit *4294.*

#### *Bolinders Co. Inc.*v. *United States.*

affirmed. C. A. D. 122.
1

MEMORANDUM

Subject: Estimating Potential Biodiesel Consumption Under Cold Weather Limitations

From: Zoltan Jung

To: EPA Air Docket EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2012

- 0546

To estimat e potential biodiesel consumption under cold weather l imitations

, we used annual

state

- by

- state diesel volume consumption estimates derived from the EPA MOtor Vehicle

Emission Simulator (MOVES)

. MOVES is a modeling system which estimates emissions of a
broad range of pollutants from highway mobile sources using estimates of emission rates for
various emission processes and vehicle activity and population inputs.

The annual diesel volume consumption estimates derived from MOVES were evenly divided
across twelve months of the year to obtain monthly diesel volume consumption estimates

. M onth ly diesel volume consumption estimates were summed for the twenty most

- northern states

in the U

. S

. These states appear in green in the chart below

. Diesel volume consumption
estimates for four cold weather months (December through March) for the twenty nor thern

- most

states were subtracted from th e sum total monthly estimates. This total was multiplied by five

volume

- percent to derive the final estimate of the volume of B5 biodiesel that c o u l d be

consumed under cold weather limitations f o r t h e n a t i o n a s a w h o l e i f B 5 i s u s e d i n a l l s t a t e s

d u r i n g a l l m o n t h s

, w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f t h e f o u r w i n t e r m o n t h s f

o r t h e t w n e t y n o r t h e r n

- m o s t

s t a t e s . This was e stimated to be a b o u t 1.9 billion gallons.

State Estimated Biodiesel

Consumption (as B5) (gal) Estimated Annual Diesel

Consumption (gal)

Alabama 4.4E+07 8.90E+08

Alaska 2.7E+06 8.10E+07

Arizona 5.2E+07 1.00E+09

Arkansas 2.2E+07 4.50E+08

California 1.5E+08 2.90E+09

Colorado 2.4E+07 4.80E+08

Connecticut 9.5E+06 1.90E+08

Delaware 4.3E+06 8.70E+07

Florida 1.3E+08 2.50E+09

Georgia 1.1E+08 2.20E+092

Idaho 1.3E+07 3.90E+08

Illinois 7.2E+07 2.10E+09

Indiana 3.9E+07 7.80E+08

Iowa 1.7E+07 5.10E+08

Kansas 2.1E+07 4.10E+08

Kentucky 4.1E+07 8.10E+08

Louisiana 3.4E+07 6.80E+08

Maine 7.3E+06 2.25E+08

Maryland 2.9E+07 5.80E+08

Massachusetts 8.8E+06 2.70E+08

Michigan 3.4E+07 1.04E+09

Minnesota 2.7E+07 8.25E+08

Mississippi 2.9E+07 5.80E+08

M issouri 9.0E+07 1.80E+09

Montana 6.8E+06 2.10E+08

Nebraska 1.2E+07 3.45E+08

Nevada 3.0E+06 6.00E+07

New Hampshire 4.4E+06 1.32E+08

New Jersey 2.9E+07 5.90E+08

New Mexico 2.1E+07 4.30E+08

New York 2.9E+07 8.55E+08

North Carolina 5.7E+07 1.10E +09

North Dakota 5.1E+06 1.50E+08

Ohio 1.0E+08 2.10E+09

Oklahoma 3.6E+07 7.10E+08

Oregon 1.4E+07 4.35E+08

Pennsylvania 5.2E+07 1.50E+09

Rhode Island 2.3E+06 4.70E+073

South Carolina 4.4E+07 8.70E+08

South Dakota 5.3E+06 1.65E+08

Tennessee 6.6E +07 1.30E+09

Texas 2.0E+08 4.10E+09

Utah 2.4E+07 4.90E+08

Vermont 2.3E+06 6.90E+07

Virginia 4.4E+07 8.90E+08

Washington 3.2E+07 9.75E+08

West Virginia 1.3E+07 2.60E+08

Wisconsin 3.1E+07 9.45E+08

Wyoming 5.7E+06 1.65E+08

Total 1. 85 E+09 4.07 E+10
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 

Costco Wholesale Corporation 

Executive Bonus Plan 
 For fiscal year 2017,
executive officers are, depending upon the individual, eligible for a bonus award of up to approximately $200,000. The final bonus amounts are subject to the approval of the Compensation Committee. 

Eligibility for up to 50% of the bonus amount is determined by whether the Company has met its pre-tax income goal for the year, as indicated in the
Company’s internal budget. 
 The remaining 50% is determined by goals relevant to the executive officer’s area of responsibility, with 20% of
that portion being a discretionary component determined by the President/Chief Executive Officer. For the President/Chief Executive Officer and the Chairman of the Board, the discretionary component is determined by the Compensation Committee:

 For those whose responsibilities are operational, the goals relate to sales, controllable expenses, shrink, and pre-tax profit in their
areas of responsibility. 
 For those whose responsibilities are primarily buying, the goals relate to sales and gross margin. 

For those who responsibilities combine operational and buying functions, the goals relate to a combination of those described in the prior two
paragraphs. 
 To be eligible for the annual bonus, the individual must still be employed by the Company at the time bonus checks are issued (November).
No. 6686.

#### STATE, EX REL., SOUTHERN PUBLISHING COMPANY vs. HON. T. C. W. ELLIS, JUDGE, ET AL.

Syllabus.

Oil Motion To Fix.

•Under the rules of this Court writs of mandamus, prohibition and the like, must be submitted on briefs on the return day-fixed in the preliminary order or rule to show cause.

D. H. Theard, for relators.

Per Curiam.

Tine rules of this Court provide (Rule 12, Section 3) that “.all writs of mandamus, prohibition, and the like, shall be fixed and submitted on printed or written briefs, and without oral argument.”

The uniform practice of this Court has been to consider the return .day fixed in the preliminary order, or rule to show cause, as a “fixing” of the writ within the meaning of the foregoing rule, and to require all such writs to- be submitted on said return day.

We perceive no error in this practice, which we are informed is in accord with the practice of the Supreme Court under a similar rule of that 'Court- (Rule 12, Section 3, Rules of the Supreme Court).

The motion to fix for a day other than the return day was therefore properly denied.

Opinion and decree, March 16th, 1916.

Syllabus.

On Application for Prohibition.

A married woman, whose only asset consists of a piece of real estate donated to her during marriage by her husband who *398still lives, is not a sufficient surety on an appeal bond, as the purchaser of such property even under execution acquires no title to the property until after prescription has run.

Opinion and decree, March 27th, 1916.

Rehearing refused, April 12th, 1916.

Writ denied, May 24th, 1916.

His Honor, JOHN ST. PAUL,

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

Reiator appealed suspensively. The trial Judge dismissed the appeal for want of a good and sufficient surety on the appeal bond. Hence this application.

The surety was a married woman and her only property consisted of a piece of real estate given to her during marriage by her husband who still lives.

The surety is not sufficient. The property owned by her and revocable at any time by her husband is not liable to seizure, that is to say, to such effective seizure as will profit the person effecting the seizure, since no sale thereof under execution conveys title to the purchaser who cannot be defeated until cured by prescription of ten years.

Leverett vs. Loeb, 117 La., 310.

The preliminary writ herein issued is recalled and relators *’*application for prohibition is dismissed.
COMMITTEE S NATURA L RESOURCES , CHAI R SELEC TCOMMITTE E O N DISABILITIES , CHAI R SELEC TCOMMITTE E O N WINE , CHAI R JOIN TCOMMITTE E O N FISHERIE S AN D AQUACULTURE , CHAI R BUDGE T BUDGE TSUBCOMMITTE E # 1 JOIN TLEGISLATIV E BUDGE T ENVIRONMENTA L SAFET YAN D TOXI C MATERIAL S GOVERNMENTA L ORGANIZATIO N WESLE Y CHESBR O ASSEMBLYMEMBER , FIRS TDISTRIC T Jul y 28,201 1 STAT E CAPITO L P.O

. BO X 94284 9 SACRAMENTO , CA94249-000 1 (916)319-200 1 FA X (916 ) 319-210 1 DISTRIC TOFFICE S 710E

. STREET , SUIT E 15 0 EUREKA , CA9550 1 (707)445-701 4 FA X (707 ) 445-660 7 5 0 "D " STREET , SUIT E 45 0 SANT AROSA , CA9540 4 (707 ) 576-252 6 FA X (707 ) 576-229 7 31 1 N

. STAT E STREE T UKIAH , CA9548 2 (707 ) 463-577 0 FA X (707 ) 463-577 3
Aloh aLe y Associat e Director , X-5 0 U S Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenu e S EW86-31 0 Washington , D C 2059 0
Re : Smal l Communit y Ai r Servic e Developmen t

Progra m Docket : DOT-OST-2011-011 9 Humbold t

County , Arcata/Eurek aAirpor t r o

C O 50: ^

Dea r Ms

. Ley : A s Californi aStat e Assemblyma n Representin g th e Firs t District , I strongl y suppor t th e ai r servic e proposa l detaile di n th e Smal l Communit y Ai r Servic e Developmen t

Progra mgran t application

. Arcata/Eurek aplay s a n importan t rol e i nprovidin g suppor t t o business , government , education , an dleisur e trave l t o an dfro mthi s northwester ncoasta l Californi a community

. Growt ho f

th e Arcata/Eurek aeconom y ove r th e pas t few year s ha s bee nfuele db y th e presenc e o f th e Arcata/Eurek aAirport

. Futur e communit y growt han deconomi c developmen t depend s i n par t o nth e Airport' s abilit y t o mee t th e growin g need s o f

loca l busines s a s wel l a s tha t o f companie s considerin g Arcata/Eurek aa s alocatio nfo r thei r operations

. Arcata/Eurek aAirpor t

ha s forge dstron g tie s wit hth e busines s communit y t o attrac t bette r ai r service

. W e appreciat e th e opportunit y t o expan dtha t partnershi p t o includ e th e Unite dState s Departmen t

o f Transportatio n thoug hth e Smal l Communit y Ai r Servic e Developmen t

Program

. Respectfully ,

ASSEMBLYMA N WESLE Y CHESBRO , 1' * Assembl y Distric t WC:ga m

cc : Trin aFroehlich , CPA/Senio r Consultant , Mea d& Hunt , Inc/ M & H Architure , Inc

. 47 6 Salt y Way , Eugene , O R9740 4

cc : Jacquely nHulsey , CA EAviatio n Divisio nManager , Publi c Work s - Divisio no f Aviation , 110 6 2"* ' Street , Eureka , C A 9550 1 -^^S=^

- Printe d o n Recycle d Pape r
| 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 Company’s financial condition and results of operations as      of the dates and for the periods presented in the financial statements      included in such report. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/John      A.      Hall                                                     |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| John A.      Hall                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
| President and Chief      Executive Officer,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |
| Interim Chief      Financial Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |