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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4456 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4456

 To amend the Granger-Thye Act to modify the maximum term for certain 
                    special use permits for housing.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 4, 2024

 Mr. Barrasso introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Granger-Thye Act to modify the maximum term for certain 
                    special use permits for housing.

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

SECTION 1. FOREST SERVICE SPECIAL USE PERMITS FOR HOUSING.

    Section 7 of the Act of April 24, 1950 (commonly known as the 
``Granger-Thye Act'') (64 Stat. 84, chapter 97; 16 U.S.C. 580d), is 
amended by striking ``thirty years as determined by him'' and inserting 
``30 years, or in the case of a permit for housing that is located west 
of the 100th meridian in the contiguous 48 States, 100 years, as 
determined by the Secretary of Agriculture''.
                                 <all>
```
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. 

Respondents contend that petitioner has no federally protected liberty interest in

parole under California law. To support that contention, respondents rely on an order of a district

judge of this court in Sass v. California Board of Prison Terms, 376 F. Supp. 2d 975 (E.D. Cal.

2005). The Sass case is under submission in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth

Circuit following oral argument on March 16, 2006. 

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:04-cv-01141-GEB-CMK Document 19 Filed 08/29/06 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

In light of the complexity of the legal issues involved, the court sua sponte 

determines that justice requires appointment of counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see

also Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Federal Public Defender is appointed to represent petitioner;

2. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of petitioner’s habeas

corpus petition (Doc. 1) and a copy of this order on Ann McClintock, Assistant Federal Public

Defender;

3. Petitioner’s counsel shall contact the Clerk’s Office to make arrangements

for copies of other documents in the file; and

4. Within 60 days of the date of service of this order, the parties are directed

to file separate reports on the status of this case, addressing in particular any issues the parties

wish to bring to the attention of the court with respect to resolving the instant petition.

DATED: August 28, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-01141-GEB-CMK Document 19 Filed 08/29/06 Page 2 of 2
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket No. RP06-569-001] 

Take notice that on February 28, 2007, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation (Transco) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed on Appendix A to the filing, to become effective March 1, 2007. 

                    Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding.                           ( print page 11017)                        Such protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding.                 

                    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at                     *http://www.ferc.gov.*                     Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.                 

                    This filing is accessible on-line at                     *http://www.ferc.gov,*                     using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,*                     or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                 

Philis J. Posey, 

Acting Secretary.

 [FR Doc. E7-4346 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HARRY J. WILLIBY,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2560 DFL JFM P

vs.

JEANNE S. WOODFORD, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On March 20, 2006, plaintiff filed objections to that portion of the magistrate judge’s

order filed March 10, 2006, which found that plaintiff had failed to state cognizable claims for

relief based on alleged confiscation of legal material, denial of post-parole services, or

harassment and retaliation. The court has reviewed plaintiff’s first amended complaint and the

magistrate judge’s order in light of plaintiff’s objections. Upon completion of this review, the

court concurs in the magistrate judge’s determination.

As a preliminary matter, the court will treat the magistrate judge’s order as findings and

recommendations to the extent that the order dismisses certain of the claims without leave to

amend. Consistent with this characterization, plaintiff appropriately has filed objections. The

order will be reviewed de novo.

Only one of plaintiff’s argument in the objections merits comment. Plaintiff contends

Case 2:04-cv-02560-JAM -JFM Document 26 Filed 08/31/06 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

that he has suffered actual injury as a result of the alleged confiscation of his legal material

because he was unable to name Doe defendants in a litigation in the Northern District of

California. Although he seems to assert that he could have named the Doe defendants in the

Northern District litigation if he had the documents, he presents no evidence of who those Does

might be, why the confiscated materials were essential to naming them, and why he did not bring

the problem to the presiding court’s attention in the Northern District during what was apparently

a lengthy litigation. 

Accordingly, good cause appearing, and upon de novo review, the court affirms the

magistrate judge’s order of March 10, 2006, and denies plaintiff’s objections. The matter will go

forward on the basis of the March 10, 2006 order.

DATED: 8/30/2006

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

/will2560.obj

Case 2:04-cv-02560-JAM -JFM Document 26 Filed 08/31/06 Page 2 of 2
#### *In*re: MONTEVIDEO PARTNERSHIP, Debtor. Christopher R. Wojciechowski, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Montevideo Partnership; et al., Respondents-Appellees.

No. 00-56556.

BAP No. CC-00-3002.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 11, 2001.*

Decided June 25, 2001.

Before O’SCANNLAIN, SILVERMAN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, we deny Wo-jciechowski's request for oral argument.

*588MEMORANDUM **

Christopher R. WojeiechowsM appeals pro se the BanM’uptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) order denying WojciechowsM’s petition for writ of mandamus from the bankruptcy court’s order designating him as a vexatious litigant. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 158(d) to review the BAP’s order denying the petition for writ of mandamus, *see Teleport Oil Co. v. Sec. Pac. Nat’l Bank (In re Teleport Oil Co.),*759 F.2d 1376, 1378 (9th Cir.1985) (order), but we lack jurisdiction to review the underlying bankruptcy order, *see Delaney v. Alexander (In re Delaney),*29 F.3d 516, 517-18 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam). We review de novo, *In re Delaney,*29 F.3d at 517-18, and we affirm.

WojeiechowsM did not file a notice of appeal within ten days from the orders designating him as a vexatious litigant or denying his motion to amend. *See*Bankr.R. 8002(a); *In re Delaney,*29 F.3d at 518. Accordingly, the bankruptcy court’s orders became final and WojeiechowsM may not use a writ of mandamus as a substitute for an untimely notice of appeal. *See Demos v. United States Dist. Court for the E. Dist. of Wash.,*925 F.2d 1160, 1161 & n. 3 (9th Cir.1991) (order); *cf. In re Teleport Oil Co.,*759 F.2d at 1378 (holding that mandamus jurisdiction is available to review a district court’s denial of a stay where bankruptcy appellant is threatened with irreparable harm and there are no other means, including the eventual appeal, to protect appellant from harm). Under these circumstances, the BAP properly denied the petition for writ of mandamus.

We grant Montevideo Partnership’s request for judicial notice.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
No. 52038.

#### Wimelbacher & Rice *v.*United States,

protests 619227-G, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as the gloves which were the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333). The claim of the plaintiff was therefore sustained.
No. 51731.

#### Protest 116199-K of Siegfried Loewenthal Co. (Cleveland).

Opinion by

Ekwall, 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 barrels numbered 51, 105, 147, 181, 188, 238, and 371, 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.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1677-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Oklahoma (FEMA-1677-DR), dated February 1, 2007, and related determinations. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

February 21, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Oklahoma is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of February 1, 2007: 

Beaver, Cimarron, and Texas Counties for Public Assistance Categories C, Roads and Bridges; D, Water Control Facilities; E, Buildings and Equipment; and G, Parks, Recreational Facilities, and Other (already designated for Categories A, Debris Removal; B, Emergency Protective Measures; and F, Utilities, under the Public Assistance program, including direct Federal assistance, if warranted.) 

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance; 97.048, Individuals and Households Housing; 97.049, Individuals and Households Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 Individuals and Households Program-Other Needs, 97.036, Public Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

R. David Paulison, 

Under Secretary for Federal Emergency Management and Director of FEMA. 

 [FR Doc. E7-3652 Filed 3-1-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
**Exhibit
        32.1**
 **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 CHAAS Acquisitions, LLC (the "Company")
        on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Alan C. Johnson,
        Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
        as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
        that:
 
 (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.
 
 
 
 
 /s/
        ALAN C. JOHNSON
 Alan
        C. Johnson
 President
        and Chief Executive Officer
 (Principal
        Executive Officer)
 August
        18, 2006
EXHIBIT 24     



                             POWER OF ATTORNEY

      KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned officers of JMB
Realty Corporation, the managing general partner of JMB INCOME PROPERTIES,
LTD. - IV, do hereby nominate, constitute and appoint GARY NICKELE, GAILEN
J. HULL, DENNIS M. QUINN or any of them, attorneys and agents of the
undersigned with full power of authority to sign in the name and on behalf
of the undersigned officers a Report on Form 10-K of said partnership for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 1995, and any and all amendments
thereto, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys and agents
and any of them may do by virtue hereof.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Power of
Attorney the 5th day of February, 1996.


H. RIGEL BARBER
-----------------------
H. Rigel Barber                          Chief Executive Officer


GLENN E. EMIG
-----------------------
Glenn E. Emig                            Chief Operating Officer


      The undersigned hereby acknowledge and accept such power of authority
to sign, in the name and on behalf of the above named officers, a Report on
Form 10-K of said partnership for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1995,
and any and all amendments thereto, the 5th day of February, 1996.


                                         GARY NICKELE
                                         -----------------------
                                         Gary Nickele



                                         GAILEN J. HULL
                                         -----------------------
                                         Gailen J. Hull



                                         DENNIS M. QUINN
                                         -----------------------
                                         Dennis M. Quinn
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v RICHARD A. ROOK, Private, U. S. Army, Appellant

16 USCMA 148, 36 CMR 304

No. 19,186

March 18, 1966

*149
      *Colonel Joseph L. Chalk, Lieutenant Colonel Martin S. Drucker,*and *Captain Francis R. Jones*were on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Colonel Joseph J. Crimmins, Lieutenant Colonel Francis M. Cooper,*and *First Lieutenant Maurice Jay Kutner*were on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

PER Curiam:

The issue presented by the accused’s petition for grant of review is the same as that considered in United States v Metz, 16 USCMA 140, 36 CMR 296. For the reasons recited in our opinion in that case, the decision of the board of review is reversed and the action of the convening authority is set aside. The record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for submission to another competent reviewing authority for further proceedings under Articles 61 and 64, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 861 and 864, respectively.
No. 42894.

#### Protests 7208-K, etc., of American Merchandise Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallingeb, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Woolworth*v. *United States*(26 C. C. P. A. 221, C. A. D. 20) certain of the paperweights were held dutiable at 40 percent under paragraph 339. Paperweights plated with silver were held dutiable at 50 percent under the same paragraph.
No. 55218.

#### L. Bamberger & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 156153-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Before the Second Division,

December 20, 1939

No. 42888.

#### Protests 840884-G, etc., of G. Klein *&*Son, Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

As there was nothing to disclose any error in the action of the collector the protests were overruled.
Exhibit 4.4.(a).92
 
 
 The State of Israel
 Ministry of Communications
  General License for Partner Communications Ltd. for the Provision of
 Mobile Radio Telephone (MRT) Services using the Cellular Method
  Amendment No. 76
 
 By virtue of the authority of the Minister of Communications under Article 4 (e) of the Communications Law (Telecommunications and Broadcasts), 5742-1982, that have been delegated to us, by all our other powers under any law and after having considered the arguments of Partner Communications Company Ltd. (hereinafter: “Partner”), we hereby amend the General License for the provision of mobile radio telephone (MRT) services using the cellular method granted to Partner on 7 April 1998,  as follows:
 
 Amendment

of Article 67D.1
1.
Instead of article 67D1.1, shall come:"
67D1.1
Premium Service, for which the payment is charged according to the Premium Tariff and is collected through the Telephone Bill shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of Appendix N.



For this matter- "Premium Services" and "Premium Tariff" as defined in Appendix N."
  (July 2, 2014)
  (sgd)
 ________________
 Avi Berger
 Director General
No. 47386.

#### Protest 71607-K of F. S. Whelan & Sons (Detroit).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

When the case was called for hearing there was no appearance on the part of the plaintiff-corporation. The protest was ordered submitted for decision on the record. As the court was unable, from an examination of the record, to discover any error in the classification and assessment of duty, the protest was overruled.