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-

 

STIPULATION ALLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF EXPERT INFORMATION

GANONG & WYATT, LLP

924 Truxtun Avenue

Bakersfield, California 93301

Telephone 661.327.3337

Facsimile 661.327.3395

Philip W. Ganong, SBN 88414

Ralph Wm. Wyatt, SBN 63247

Attorneys for Plaintiff RAFAEL TORRES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAFAEL TORRES,

Plaintiff,

vs.

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, 

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CIV.S-04-2670 FCD GGH

STIPU L ATION ALLOWIN G

SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF

EXPERT INFORMATION

TRIAL DATE: March 28, 2006 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between all parties to this action, and their

attorneys of record, as follows:

1. The parties hereby stipulate to permit each party to provide supplemental

disclosure of expert information required by FRCP Rule 26(2) after the initial disclosure date

set by the Court, at appropriate intervals, and no later than the pre-trial disclosure date set

by the court or by FRCP Rule 26(3).

2. This Stipulation is entered into in light of the fact that the Court has set the

initial date for disclosure of experts prior to the cut off of discovery and eight months prior

to the date currently set for the trial of this matter. The parties agree the probability of

additional evidence being obtained between the initial disclosure date and the trial date is

high and the parties should have the right to supplement their disclosure and designation

in the event that additional evidence warrants such change.

Case 2:04-cv-02670-FCD-GGH Document 13 Filed 07/26/05 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

27

28

-2-

 

STIPULATION ALLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF EXPERT INFORMATION

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: July 19, 2005. GANONG & WYATT, LLP

By__________________________________

Philip W. Ganong/Ralph Wm. Wyatt

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Dated: July 19, 2005. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

By: 

Robert N. Belt

Attorneys for Defendant

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 26, 2005 .

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02670-FCD-GGH Document 13 Filed 07/26/05 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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIRECTV, INC., a California ) 2:04-cv-02407-GEB-GGH

corporation, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) ORDER CONTINUING STATUS

) (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING)

GLEN BOWEN, ) CONFERENCE

)

Defendant. )

)

Plaintiff’s September 6, 2005, Status Report states the

default judgment in this matter is currently pending before the

magistrate judge. Therefore, the Status Conference is continued to

December 12, 2005, at 9:00 a.m. Plaintiff shall file a status report

no later than November 28, 2005, in which Plaintiff is only required

to explain the status of the default issue. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 7, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge 

Case 2:04-cv-02407-GEB-GGH Document 19 Filed 09/07/05 Page 1 of 1
No. 58589.

protests 219003-K, etc. (New York).

#### Browne Vintners Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 130, C. A. D. 508) and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 58586.

protests 170407-K, etc. (New York).

#### Williams Importers Div. of R. C. Williams & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

*463Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 130, C. A. D. 508) and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

 

ROBERT GALLEGOS SR. 

Petitioner,

v.

TOM CAREY, et. al., 

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civ.S-04-02741-MCE GGH P

FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on petitioner’s counsel’s representations, filed on August 9, 2005,

including the averment that respondent does not oppose petitioner’s motion for a stay, IT IS

HEREBY RECOMMENDED that further proceedings in this case be stayed pending the

California Supreme Court’s resolution of the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by petitioner

in No. S136199 and that the stay remain in effect until 30 days following the entry of a final

order by the California Supreme Court in No. S136199. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within ten days

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

Case 2:04-cv-02741-MCE -GGH Document 25 Filed 08/16/05 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

27

28

“Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 8/16/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

_________________________________

HONORABLE GREGORY HOLLOWS

United States Magistrate Judge

gall2741.fr

Case 2:04-cv-02741-MCE -GGH Document 25 Filed 08/16/05 Page 2 of 2
### SERVED: August 23, 2016 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS WASHINGTON, DC
InThe Matter Of: UNITED PARCEL SERVICE COMPANY Respondent ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket No. FAA-2014-0806
Case No. 2011CE250036
ORDER DISMISSING PROCEEDING OnJanuary 24, 2015, a Corrected Order Cancelling the Rule 16 Litigation Scheduling Conference was filed. OnAugust 22, 2016, the FAA filed its Withdrawal ofComplaint, stating that 

### "[p]ursuant to a settlementreached by the parties
...the [FAA], by counsel, hereby withdraws its Complaint dated October 15, 2014." 1 After having reviewed the case file, all pleadings and motions, all relevant caselaw, statutes, regulations, rules, and authority, and being fully advised; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: Pursuantto 14 C.F.R. § 13.215, the FAA has withdrawn its Complaint, and·this proceeding is dismissed with prejudice.

Attachment: Service List

1 On August 22, 2016, Office ofHearings attorney staffe-mailed the FAA and Respondent's counsel ofrecord to confirmthat the caption appearing on the Withdrawal ofComplaint contained an incorrect DocketNumber (FAA2016-0806, rather than FAA-2014-0806) and the FAA served the Withdrawal ofComplaint onthe correct counsel, Mr. Paul Alp. Respondent's former counsel, Mr. Allan Horowitz, confirmed that Mr. Alp and his firm hadtaken over the case. 'DocketNo. FAA-2014-0806 (Civil Penalty Action) 

### SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 1

Ms. Andrea Michelle Harper Complainant's Counsel Federal Aviation Administration Office ofthe Regional Counsel, ASO-7 Southern Region 1701 ColumbiaAvenue College Park, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FAX: 404-305-5223 Mr. Paul Alp Respondent's Counsel Crowell & Moring LLP 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20004-2595 TEL: 202-624-2500 FAX: 202-628-5116 Judge J.E. Sullivan US. Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536 ONE COPY

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC--430.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION VII 901 NORTH 5TH STREET KANSAS CITY, KANSAS 66101

September 23, 2011
Raymond D Zaracki
4130 South 41 Avenue Omaha, Nebraska 68107

RE: SAID: 32373
1805 Pratt Street Lead-Based Paint (LBP) Assessment

Dear Owner/Resident:

A Lead Based Paint assessment was recently performed on your property by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as part of the Omaha Lead site investigation. The purpose of this assessment is to determine whether a significant quantity of LBP is present on the exterior surface of structures, where deteriorating paint conditions (peeling, flaking, cracking, etc) exist that might increase lead concentrations in the yard above acceptable levels.

Enclosed are the LBP assessment sheets for 1805 Pratt Street. The EPA has developed paint stabilization eligibility criteria that involve measuring the amount of deteriorated LBP on a structure and calculating the concentration of lead in soils around the home that would result if all of the identified deteriorated paint were to fall to the ground and uniformly mix with the soil under certain assumptions. During the LBP assessment, the areal extent of the deteriorated paint observed on structure surfaces was estimated and the lead content in the deteriorated paint was measured using an X-Ray Fluorescence instrument.

The data obtained during the LBP assessment was used to estimate the increase in soil lead concentration that would result if all of the deteriorating paint identified in the assessment were to fall to the ground and mix with surface soil within six feet of the foundation of the structure. For purposes of this calculation, the deteriorating LBP on a structure is assumed to fall onto the ground surface within six feet of the foundation and be uniformly mixed with the top one inch of soil. The estimated lead concentration in the soil potentially caused by the deteriorating LBP provides a measure of the severity of LBP deterioration on individual structures. The EPA uses these criteria to rank properties based on the potential for recontamination of soil to occur. Paint stabilization is being offered at only those households with the most severe LBP problems, particularly where children under the age of seven reside.

The LBP assessment performed by the EPA using the above criteria indicated that your house IS NOT eligible for paint stabilization.If you have any questions or concerns, please contact the EPA Public Information Center at (402) 731-3045.

Sincerely,

Pauletta R. France-Isetts Project Coordinator Environmental Protection Agency

Enclosures Para información en español, llame al EPA Information Center (402) 731-3045.Omaha Lead Site LBP Assessment 

# 1111111 Ill11 11111 11111 11111 1111 

# 1111 323 73

LEGEND: H 

### - N

- P 

### - 01 

### - 32373

I BVlD Numbel -Sample Number

-Mater~al P = Pa~nt
S~de of Structure N = North S = South E = East W = West

I 1

- Structure Type H = House G = Garage S = Shed F = Fence
Sample Number Lead Loading StructurelFeature Substrate Color Deteriorated (W~ndow, siding, porch, etc.) (Wood, concrete, etc.) Area

fl'
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Wells Real Estate Investment Trust II, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
Report), the undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Principal Executive Officer of the Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Principal Financial Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to
§906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our 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 results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                           
|---------------------------
|/s/ LEO F. WELLS, III      
|Leo F. Wells, III          
|Principal Executive Officer
|May 9, 2007                
|                           
|/s/ DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS    
|Douglas P. Williams        
|Principal Financial Officer
|May 9, 2007
No. 64171.

protest 59/20670 (New York).

#### Olam Trading Corporation *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Since the protest was filed more than 60 days after liquidation, it was dismissed as untimely, by virtue of section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.
December 21, 1939

No. 42907.

Suit 4263.

#### S. *E. Laszlo*v. *United States,*

C. D. 144 affirmed.
No. 41787.

#### Protests 699903-G, etc., of Mattia Locatelli N. Y. Branch, Inc., et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of Abstract 40880 it was held that an allowance should have been made in the weight of the cheese to compensate for the inedible covering on the outside.
No. 67839.

#### Newco European Import Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 62/15618 (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *Falcon Sales Company*and *J. J. Murphy & Co.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 129, C.D. 2292), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

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 - 

) 

PAMELA E. COGAN (SBN 105089) 

ROBERT M. FORNI, JR. (SBN 180841) 

ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY 

1001 Marshall Street 

Redwood City, CA 94063 

Telephone: (650) 364-8200 

Facsimile: (650) 780-1701 

Email: pcogan@ropers.com

rforni@ropers.com

Attorneys for Defendant, 

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JOSE A. LOPEZ and DIANA LOPEZ, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, JOSE A. LOPEZ, JR., and 

DOES 1-20, 

Defendant. 

CASE NO. CIV-S-04-1447 MCE (GGH) 

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, 

Counterclaimant, 

v. 

JOSE A. LOPEZ, DIANA LOPEZ, JOSE 

A. LOPEZ, JR., CASEY BEGLEY, and 

MARDIERON MCCORMICK, by and 

through his Guardian ad Litem, 

Counter-Defendants. 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between plaintiffs and counterdefendants JOSE A. LOPEZ and DIANA LOPEZ and defendant and counter-claimant, LIBERTY 

MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY (“Liberty Mutual”), by and through their respective 

counsel of record herein, that the above-captioned Complaint by plaintiffs JOSE A. LOPEZ and 

Case 2:04-cv-01447-MCE -GGH Document 64 Filed 09/14/05 Page 1 of 2
R

o

p

e

r

s

M

aje

s

ki K

o

h

n

&

B

e

ntle

y

A

Professional Corporation

Redwood City

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 

- 2 - 

) 

DIANA LOPEZ and Counterclaim by Liberty Mutual as against plaintiffs and counter-defendants 

JOSE A. LOPEZ and DIANA LOPEZ shall be and hereby are dismissed with prejudice. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: August 31, 2005 SCHWARZKOPF & ALLIN 

By: /s/ Jon S. Allin 

JON S. ALLIN 

Attorneys for Plaintiff, 

JOSE A. LOPEZ and DIANA LOPEZ 

Dated: August 30, 2005 ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY 

By: /s/ Pamela E. Cogan 

PAMELA E. COGAN 

ROBERT M. FORNI, JR. 

Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-claimant, 

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE 

COMPANY 

ORDER

The foregoing stipulation is approved, and is so ORDERED. 

Dated: September 13, 2005 

__________________________________ 

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

Case 2:04-cv-01447-MCE -GGH Document 64 Filed 09/14/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 66853.

#### Alexanders Dept. Stores, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 315656-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of nylon traveling bags similar in use to leather traveling bags and following the principles set forth in *United States*v. *Steinberg Bros.*(47 C.C.P.A. 47, C.A.D. 727), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
August 23, 1944

No. 49685.

Suit 4460.

#### United *States*v. *M. S. Cowen & Co.*

C. D. 783 reversed. C. A. D. 283.
No. 49680.

#### Protests 922946-G, etc., of H. Cron Co. et al. (Portland, Oreg.).

Opinion by

Lawrence, "J.

The cases were marked submitted and as plaintiffs did not move later to set aside the submission, the protests were overruled, examination of the papers disclosing no reason for disturbing the decision of the collector, which was held presumptively correct.
April 10, 1946

No. 51014.

Abstract 50945.

#### Protests 35743-K, etc., of Haddad & Sons et al.

Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

             CORPORATE PROPERTY ASSOCIATES 16 - GLOBAL INCORPORATED

                  CERTIFICATION OF CO-CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
                       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 Corporate Property Associates
16-Global Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June
30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), we, William Polk Carey, Co-Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, and Gordon F. DuGan, Co-Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, to the best of our knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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/  William Polk Carey                    /s/  Gordon F. DuGan
     -------------------------------            -------------------------------

     William Polk Carey                         Gordon F. DuGan
     Chairman                                   Vice Chairman
     (Co-Chief Executive Officer)               (Co-Chief Executive Officer)
     8/6/2004                                   8/6/2004
     -------------------------------            -------------------------------
     Date                                       Date

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, 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 Corporate Property Associates
16-Global Incorporated and will be retained by Corporate Property Associates
16-Global Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
# AGENDA

Consultation with the 

# Maine Tribal 

## Leaders 

# Maine Revised 

# Water Quality 

## Standards

• Introductions 

# Wednesday April3rd 2013 

# 900am I

# 200pm

• Opening Remarks Curt Spalding

• Technical and Legal Overview Williamson Ellen Weitzler

### Tim

• Tribal Input Discussion Tribal Leaders Meeting Participants Tribal Leaders Richard Getchell Chief Aroostook 

### Band of

### Micmacs Bill 

### Thompson Vice Chief Penobscot Indian Nation Clayton Sockabasin Vice Chief Passamaquoddy Tribe Indian 

## Twp Tribal Environmental Directors 

### Managers



## EPA Attendees Marvin Cling Environmental Planner Passamaquoddy Tribe ofIndians Pleasant Point John 

### Banks Natural Resources Director Penobscot Indian Nation 

### Dan Kusnierz Water Resources 

### Manager Penobscot Indian Nation Trevor

### White Passamaquoddy Tribe ofIndians Indian Township Sharri

## Venno Environmental Planner Houlton 

### Band of Maliseet Indians Fred 

### Corey Environmental Director Aroostook 

### Band of

### Micmacs CurtSpalding Regional Administrator Ira Leighton Deputy Regional Administrator 

### Tim Williamson Deputy Director Office of Regional Counsel 

### Ken Moraff Acting Director Office ofEcosystem Protection Ellen Weitzler Water Quality Standards Coordinator Stephen Perkins 

### Ocean Coastal Programs Lois

## Adams Branch Chief Grants Tribal 

### Community Pgms 

## CAPT Michael Stover Tribal Program Manager Location 

## EPA Region 1 Office 5 Post Office Square Boston

# MA
PUBLIC LAW 111–305—DEC. 14, 2010 124 STAT. 3279 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 6387: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010): 

Nov. 16, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 2, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–305 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 337 West 

Clark Street in Eureka, California, as the ‘‘Sam Sacco Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SAM SACCO POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 337 West Clark Street in Eureka, California, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sam Sacco Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Sam Sacco Post Office Building’’. 

Approved December 14, 2010. 

Dec. 14, 2010 

[H.R. 6387] 


etreine on DSKHP91DQ1 with PUBLIC LAWS