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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAYMOND LARRY CARRASCO,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2595 MCE KJM P

vs.

SCOTT KERNAN, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, a request to proceed in forma pauperis and a request for

the appointment of counsel.

Examination of the in forma pauperis affidavit reveals that petitioner is unable to

afford the costs of suit. Accordingly, the request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is

granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

Because petitioner may be entitled to the relief requested in his application for

writ of habeas corpus if the claimed violation of constitutional rights is proved, respondent will

be directed to file an answer.

There currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas

proceedings. See Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996). However, 18 U.S.C.

§ 3006A authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case “if the interests of justice 

Case 2:04-cv-02595-MCE -KJM Document 2 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

so require.” See Rule 8(c), Fed. R. Governing § 2254 Cases. In the present case, the court does

not find that the interests of justice would be served by the appointment of counsel at the present

time. 

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted; 

2. Respondent is directed to file an answer within sixty days from the date of this

order. See Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. Respondent shall include with the

answer any and all transcripts or other documents relevant to the determination of the issues

presented in the application. Rule 5, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases;

3. Petitioner's traverse, if any, is due on or before thirty days from the date

respondents’ answer is filed;

4. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of

petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus on Jo Graves, Senior Assistant Attorney

General.

5. Petitioner’s December 7, 2004 request for appointment of counsel is denied

without prejudice to a renewal of the motion at a later stage of the proceedings.

DATED: May 18, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1/kf

carr2595.110 

Case 2:04-cv-02595-MCE -KJM Document 2 Filed 05/19/05 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002    

In connection with the Annual Report of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (the"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), theundersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that: 

     (1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

     (2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

| Dated:  March 5, 2004 |  | /s/ Richard D.    Kinder                                  |
|---------------------------------|--|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 |  | Richard D. Kinder    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |

----

----
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4640 

AN ACT 

To strengthen trafficking victim assistance grant funding. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 4640 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Supporting Victims 

3 of Human Trafficking Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. GRANTS TO ASSIST VICTIMS OF TRAFFICKING. 

5 Section 107(b)(2) of the Trafficking Victims Protec6 tion Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7105(b)(2)) is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (B)— 

8 (A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by 

9 striking ‘‘shall’’ and insert ‘‘may’’; 

10 (B) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘three per11 cent’’ and inserting ‘‘ up to 7 percent’’; 

12 (C) in clause (ii)— 

13 (i) by striking ‘‘5 percent’’ and insert14 ing ‘‘up to 10 percent’’; and 

15 (ii) by inserting ‘‘and strengthening 

16 program administration and budgeting’’ 

17 after ‘‘activities’’; and 

18 (D) in clause (iii), by striking ‘‘one per19 cent’’ and inserting ‘‘up to 1 percent’’; and 
3 

†S 4640 ES

1 (2) in subparagraph (C), strike ‘‘75 percent’’ 

2 and insert ‘‘95 percent’’. 

Passed the Senate December 19 (legislative day, December 16), 2024. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4640 

AN ACT 

To strengthen trafficking victim assistance grant 

funding.
No. 49194.

#### Protest 101955-K of Daniel F. Young, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

An examination of the record failed to disclose evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s decision. The protest was therefore overruled.
No. 58584.

protest 210874-K (New York).

#### Eskil Halle and George G. Lippelgoes *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is similar in all material respects to the paper napkins the subject of *Freund Mayer & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 123, C. A. D. 474). Upon the agreed statement of facts and following the cited authority, it was held that the merchandise is dutiable at 15 percent under said paragraph 1413, as modified, *supra.*
Case No. 8,451.

#### LOCKWOOD et al. v. WALKER.

[3 McLean, 431.] 1

Circuit Court, D. Ohio.

July Term, 1844.

Landlord and Tenant — Paramount Title of Landlord.

A stranger who obtains possession through a tenant, though by purchase of the land, cannot dispute the landlord's title.

[This was an action at law by Doe ex dem Lockwood and others against Leicester Walker.]

Ewing and Hart, for lessors of plaintiff.

Mr. Squires, for defendant.

OPINION OF THE COURT.

The plaintiff proved that Garret Smith leased the premises in controversy, from the ancestor of the lessors of the plaintiff; and that, while in possession, he sold them to Walker, the defendant. The lease to Smith having expired, the defendant claimed under his purchase.

THE COURT

instructed the jury, that as the entry was under Smith, the tenant of the lessors, the defendant, Walker, could not dispute the plaintiff’s title, and that, consequently, they must find for the plaintiff. The verdict was accordingly so rendered.
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

KELLY TERRY, No. CIV-S-04-2451 MCE/CMK P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

JUSTIN WARD, ET AL., 

Defendants.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this

civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local

Rule 72-302(c)(21).

On November 3, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and

recommendations herein which were served on plaintiff and which

contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the findings

and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. Plaintiff

has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.

///

Case 2:04-cv-02451-MCE -CMK Document 21 Filed 12/02/05 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

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 November 3,

2005, are adopted in full; and

2. Defendants California Department of Corrections, Oss,

Guilani, Hammerstone, Lucaccini, Mallett, Garrigan, Phillips,

Puckett, Mayo, Telschow, Luna, Schultz, Lundeberg, Quinn,

Ambrose, and Everett are dismissed from this action, with

prejudice.

DATED: December 1, 2005

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-02451-MCE -CMK Document 21 Filed 12/02/05 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

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

Anthony L. Patton,

Plaintiff, No. Civ. S 04-1893 FCD PAN P

vs. Notice

R. S. Johnson, et al.,

Defendants.

-oOoPlaintiff is a prisoner, without counsel, seeking leave to

commence an action against prison officials for civil rights

violations in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). 

This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 72-302

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1915(b)(1), plaintiff must pay the $150.00 filing fee required

by 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a) (1996). No initial partial filing fee has

been assessed. However, plaintiff must make monthly payments of

20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to his trust 

Case 2:04-cv-01893-FCD-EFB Document 17 Filed 06/30/05 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

fund account. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The agency having custody

of plaintiff is required to forward payments from plaintiff’s

account to the clerk of the court each time the amount in the

account exceeds $10 until the filing fee is paid. 

The clerk of the court shall serve a copy of this notice and

a copy of plaintiff’s in forma pauperis application upon the

Director of the California Department of Corrections and deliver

a copy of this notice to the clerk’s financial division.

Dated: June 29, 2005. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01893-FCD-EFB Document 17 Filed 06/30/05 Page 2 of 2
(Reap. Dec. 10757)

#### New York Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 823; 1095.

(Decided May 19, 1964)

*Stein & Shostak*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*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 respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the entries the subject of the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Cases which is incorporated-herein, consists of dolls, etc., exported from Japan, and that, on the dates of exportation thereof to the United States, the market value or the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantity *566and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, including the costs of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, were the invoice unit values plus f.o.b. charges set out on the invoices, but not including the buying commission.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that as to any of the merchandise covered by the entries the subject of the appeals for reappraisement enumerated in the attached Schedule of Oases, which is included on the list of articles designated by the Secretary of the Treasury in T.D. 54521 as provided for in Sec. 6(a) of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, Public Law 927, 84th Congress, which is subject to appraisement under Section 402(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, that there were no higher foreign values for such or similar merchandise on the dates of exportation involved herein.

On tbe agreed facts, I find that the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question is statutory export value, and hold that such value therefor is the invoice unit values, plus f.o.b. charges set out on the invoices, but not including the buying commission.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
<PAGE>

                     32.1 SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CEO

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund V,
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
George S. Springsteen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

         (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/ George S. Springsteen
-------------------------
George S. Springsteen
Chief Executive Officer
August 11, 2005
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

LOK T. LAU,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2351 WBS DAD

v.

ANTONIO V. SILVA, 

Defendant. ORDER

__________________________/

This action was assigned to United States District Judge William B. Shubb and,

pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(21), was referred to Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd. However,

plaintiff and defendant are now both represented by counsel. In accordance with Local Rule 72-

302(c)(21), this matter shall be referred back to the assigned District Judge. The Status (Pretrial

Scheduling) Order issued on November 9, 2006, remains in effect as to all dates and provisions except

that motions other than discovery motions shall be noticed for hearing before United States District

 /////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02351-WBS-DAD Document 72 Filed 04/13/07 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

Judge William B. Shubb. All documents filed in the future in this matter shall display the case number

CIV S-04-2351 WBS DAD, without the “PS” designation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 12, 2007.

DAD:lg

DDad1/orders.prose/lau2351.referDJ

Case 2:04-cv-02351-WBS-DAD Document 72 Filed 04/13/07 Page 2 of 2
No. 47400.

#### Protest 22265-K of W. R. Zanes *&*Co. (Galveston).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

At the trial the entry was offered and admitted in evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs and the case was submitted. From an examination of the papers the court was unable to find anything to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector’s action. The protest was therefore overruled.
Exhibit 31.1

I, Lawrence Schaffer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of Case Financial, Inc.;

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  report  does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements
were made, not  misleading  with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this quarterly  report,  fairly present in all material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officer  and  I  are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,  or caused such disclosure
controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to ensure that
material  information  relating  to  the  company,  including  its  consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,  particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)  Evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  company's  disclosure  controls  and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions  about the effectiveness
of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the company's  internal  control over
financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report
that has materially affected,  or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
company's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's   board  of  directors  (or  persons   performing   the  equivalent
functions):

a) all significant  deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which  could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability  to record,  process,
summarize and report  financial data and have  identified  for the  registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. I have  indicated in this  quarterly  report  whether there were  significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal  controls  subsequent  to the  date  of  our  most  recent  evaluation,
including any  corrective  actions with regard to significant  deficiencies  and
material weaknesses.


/s/ Lawrence Schaffer
------------------------
Lawrence Schaffer
Chief Financial Officer
October 24, 2005
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ALEXIS NICOLE HILIGH,

Appellant,

v.

WILL WILLIAMS, III,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-3346

[October 16, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Fabienne E. Fahnestock, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

FMCE2017-008890.

Alexis Nicole Hiligh, El Paso, Texas, pro se.

Alan R. Burton of Alan Burton Law, Boca Raton, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 

1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979).

DAMOORGIAN, CIKLIN and GERBER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
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

TIMOTHY O’KEEFE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2277 DFL JFM P

vs.

SERGEANT DIEBALL, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 12, 2005, plaintiff filed a motion for a second extension of time to

respond to defendants’ March 14, 2005 motion to dismiss and for court-ordered access to the

prison law library. In said motion, plaintiff contends, inter alia, that he has been separated from

“98% of his legal work including defendants’ motion to dismiss” since his transfer to Salinas

Valley State Prison. By order filed June 6, 2005, defendants were directed to respond to the

contentions in plaintiff’s May 12, 2005 motion. On June 17, 2005, defendants filed a response to

plaintiff’s motion, and on June 28, 2005, plaintiff filed a reply to defendants’ response.

After review of plaintiff’s motion and the documents filed in support of and

opposition to said motion, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02277-DFL -JFM Document 34 Filed 07/11/05 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

1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send plaintiff a copy of the complaint

filed in this action on October 26, 2004;

2. Within five days from the date of this order defendants shall reserve on

plaintiff a copy of their March 14, 2005 motion to dismiss;

3. Plaintiff’s May 12, 2005 request for court-ordered copies of other documents

filed in this action is denied;

4. Plaintiff may obtain a copy of the docket and any document filed in this action

by contacting Attorney’s Diversified Services (ADS), 1424 21st Street, Sacramento, CA 95814,

telephone number 916-441-4396 or by sending a representative to either division of the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of California;

5. Plaintiff’s May 12, 2005 request for court-ordered access to the law library is

denied; 

6. Plaintiff’s May 12, 2005 request for an extension of time is granted; and

7. Plaintiff is granted one additional period of thirty days from the date of this

order in which to file and serve an opposition to defendants’ March 14, 2005 motion to dismiss. 

No further extensions of time will be granted for any reason. 

DATED: July 7, 2005.

12/kf

okee2277.36sec 

Case 2:04-cv-02277-DFL -JFM Document 34 Filed 07/11/05 Page 2 of 2
No. 62568.

#### Ellis Silver Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 159468-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of candlesticks and candelabras similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 62036, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.