alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Before the First Division,

November 30, 1960

No. 64928.

#### R. H. Elsbach *& Co.,*Inc., and H. B. Thomas et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/6366, etc. (San Francisco).

*385Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that tbe items marked “A” consist of glass jars, produced by automatic machine, fitted with ground-glass stoppers, and ordinarily used to hold and transport confectionery, which confectionery is dutiable at 14 percent under paragraph 506, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802), the items were held dutiable at the said current rate of 14 percent for the contents of said glass jars under paragraph 218(e), as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 52739), by virtue of paragraph 218(h) of the tariff act. The items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of glass jars, filled with and used as containers of soap “marbles,” produced otherwise than by automatic machine, fitted with or designed for use with ground-glass stoppers, were held dutiable at 37% percent under paragraph 218(e), as modified by T.D. 51802, supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 51898), and paragraph 218(h) of the tariff act.
1 DAVID S. WHITE, ESQ. (STATE BAR NO. 078563)

JONATHAN C. BALFUS, ESQ. (STATE BAR NO. 155532) 

2 FAINSBERT MASE & SNYDER, LLP 

11835 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 1100 East 

3 Los Angeles~ California 90064-5001 

 Telephone: (310) 473-6400 x124 

4 Facsimile: (310) 473-8702 

5 Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant 

 DISCO AZTECA DISTRIBUTORS, INC. 6 

7 

8 

9 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

10 SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

11

12 UMG RECORDINGS, INC., etc., et al. 

13 Plaintiffs, 

14 vs.

15 DISCO AZTECA DISTRIBUTORS,

INC., et aI., 

16

Defendants.

17 

18 AND RELATED CROSS-CLAIM 

19 

20 

) Case No.: CIV 2-04-02611 FCD DAD 

) 

) SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYS FOR 

) DISCO AZTECA DISTRIBUTORS, INC. AND 

ORDER THEREON 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

21

THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES ARE NOTIFIED THAT pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(g), 

Defendant and Cross-Complainant Disco Azteca Distributors, Inc. hereby 

22 substitutes its attorneys in this action as follows: 

23

24 Former Attorneys: David Samuel White, Esq., White, Bordy & Levey, LLP, 1880 

25 Century Park East, Suite 200, Los Angeles, CA 90067-1602, Tel.: 310-551-9700, 26 

dswhite@wbllaw.com;

27 

28

Case 2:04-cv-02611-FCD-DAD Document 22 Filed 12/29/05 Page 1 of 3
,I

I 

1 New Attorneys: David Samuel White, Esq., Fainsbert, Mase & Snyder, LLP, 

2 11835 West Olympic Blvd., Suite 1100 East, Los Angeles, CA 90064-5001, Tel.: 3103 473-6400 x 124, 

dwhite@fms-Iaw.com. 

4 

5 I consent to this substitution. 

6 DATE: September 8, 2005 DISCO AZTECA DISTRIBUTORS, INC. 

I 

8 

9 

10 

11 I consent to this substitution. 

12 DATE: September 15, 2005 

14 

15 

16 

17 I consent to this substitution. 

18 DATE: September 16, 2005 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

IT IS SO ORDERED: 

24 DATED: December 29, 2005 

 /s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. . 

 United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02611-FCD-DAD Document 22 Filed 12/29/05 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:04-cv-02611-FCD-DAD Document 22 Filed 12/29/05 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001052743
<NAME> RECKSON SERVICE INDUSTRIES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                            2094
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    26991
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 29085
<PP&E>                                              48
<DEPRECIATION>                                       5
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   29130
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             6900
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           247
<OTHER-SE>                                       21982
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     29130
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 (439)
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     1001
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    29
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 901
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2370)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.21)
No. 53607.

protests 114343-K, etc. (Baltimore).

#### Maryland Distillers Products Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *Untied States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8219 

AN ACT 

To require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study 

to assess the suitability and feasibility of designating 

certain land as the Lahaina National Heritage Area, 

and for other purposes. 

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

•HR 8219 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Lahaina National Her3 itage Area Study Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

5 In this Act: 

6 (1) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

7 the Secretary of the Interior. 

8 (2) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State 

9 of Hawaii. 

10 (3) STUDY AREA.—The term ‘‘study area’’ 

11 means the census-designated place of Lahaina in 

12 Maui County in the State. 

13 SEC. 3. LAHAINA NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA STUDY. 

14 The Secretary, in coordination with the County of 

15 Maui and in consultation with State and local historic 

16 preservation officers, State and local historical societies, 

17 State and local tourism offices, and other appropriate or18 ganizations and governmental agencies, shall carry out, in 

19 accordance with section 120103(a) of title 54, United 

20 States Code, a study to assess the suitability and feasi21 bility of designating the study area as a National Heritage 
3 

•HR 8219 EH

1 Area, to be known as the ‘‘Lahaina National Heritage 

2 Area’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 4, 

2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8219 

AN ACT 

To require the Secretary of the Interior to conduct 

Heritage Area, and for other purposes. designating certain land as the Lahaina National a study to assess the suitability and feasibility of
## IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS District of St. Thomas/St. John

United Resources LTD. CO., Plaintiff vs. Virgin Islands Waste Management Authority, Roger Merritt, in his official capacity as executive director of Virgin Islands Waste Management Authority, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS and ANTHONY THOMAS, in his official capacity as commissioner of the Department of Property and Procurement Defendants. Case Number: ST-2020-CV-00493 Action:Debt And Breach Of Contract



## NOTICE of ENTRY of Order

To: Teeluck Persad, Esq. Robert V. Goldsmith, III, Esq. Clive C. Rivers, Esq. Sheena Conway, Esq.

Please take notice that on February 29, 2024 a(n) Order Denying Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss As Moot &

Memorandum Opinion And Order dated February 23, 2024 was/were entered by the Clerk in the above-titled matter.

Dated: February 29, 2024 Tamara Charles Clerk of the Court By:

Elizabeth A. David

Chief Deputy Clerk
Final Environmental Impact Statement - Appendices 

 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest D3 - 1 

APPENDIX D-3 

Forestwide Management Direction -– 

Winter Recreation Opportunities

Introduction 

The Wasatch-Cache National Forest is using Winter Recreation Classes as a management tool to 

describe and allocate outdoor winter recreation areas and routes. Winter Recreation (WR) is one 

of four management direction elements used in this FEIS, the others being Management 

Prescription Categories (MPC), Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) and Scenery 

Management System (SMS). The WR system provides a way to help managers and recreation 

users understand where winter motorized recreation is allowed; which areas allow Heli-skiing; 

and where winter motorized uses are not allowed. These Winter Recreation Classes and Maps 

replace the winter portion of District Travel Management Plans. The system is applied in 

combination with other management direction such as desired future conditions, standards, 

guidelines, goals, and objectives to define expectations about management of a particular area of 

the forest. 

The classes below provide a description of each of the four WR classes applied to the WasatchCache National Forest. These classes were applied using criteria established in Appendix B WR 

Process. WR maps of the classes for each of the alternatives can be found in the Map Packets. 

Winter Recreation Classes

 

Winter Recreation maps answer three basic questions: 

1. “Where can I snowmobile?” 

2. “Where is helicopter skiing allowed?” 

3. “Where is winter motorized use not allowed?” 

 

The Winter Recreation Class applies when there is an adequate depth of snow present on the 

ground to protect vegetative resources. When there is an inadequate depth of snow present, 

summer ROS maps as well as Travel Management Plans apply and use of snowmobiles is not 

permitted off of designated routes. 

Four classes are mapped for Winter Recreation: 

1) Wilderness—these areas show designated wilderness and recommended Wilderness. 

Snowmobiling, heli-skiing, or other motorized use is not allowed. 

2) Non-motorized Areas – These areas emphasize non-motorized winter recreation 

such as x-country skiing, snowshoeing, tubing, etc., no snowmobiles or other 

motorized uses are allowed. 
Final Environmental Impact Statement - Appendices 

 

Wasatch-Cache National Forest D3 - 2 

3) Motorized – Snowmobiling is permitted in these areas and/or on designated routes. 

Non-motorized uses are also permitted here. 

4) Heli-skiing – These areas are designated for heli-skiing (helicopter supported 

backcountry skiing), generally, there is no snowmobiling allowed in these areas 

unless otherwise noted. Other non-motorized uses are permitted.
Case 2:04-cv-02574-MCE -GGH   Document 21    Filed 07/25/05   Page 1 of 1

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2012-07-24T02:47:27-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
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

NICOLAS TRUJILLO, No. 2:04-cv-2368-MCE-GGH-P

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER

D. LORUSSO, 

Defendant.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed

this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

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 February 13, 2006, 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 (20)

days. 

Case 2:04-cv-02368-MCE -GGH Document 38 Filed 04/21/06 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

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 February 13, 2006

are adopted in full; and 

2. Defendant’s November 22, 2005, Motion for Summary

Judgment is granted.

DATED: April 20, 2006

_____________________________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:04-cv-02368-MCE -GGH Document 38 Filed 04/21/06 Page 2 of 2
Case No. 18,831.

#### The TENNESSEE.

[Cited in The Selma, Case No. 12,647. Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]
================================================================================

EXHIBIT  31.1 CERTIFICATION


I, Kevin Kelly, President, certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Patient
Portal Technologies, Inc.;

         2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 officers 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 to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

         b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

         c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

         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 the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing
theequivalent 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. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in
this quarterly report whether or not 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.



Dated: 8/10/2007         /s/ KEVIN KELLY
                        ----------------------
                        Kevin Kelly
                        President, Director


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8233 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8233

 To amend the USAID Branding Modernization Act to require the sole use 
 of United States flags and logos on articles of United States foreign 
                  assistance, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 2, 2024

    Mr. Mast (for himself, Ms. Salazar, Mr. Baird, and Mr. Lawler) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                            Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the USAID Branding Modernization Act to require the sole use 
 of United States flags and logos on articles of United States foreign 
                  assistance, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION TO BRANDING REQUIREMENT.

    Section 2 of the USAID Branding Modernization Act (22 U.S.C. 2401 
note) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``is authorized to 
        prescribe'' and all that follows through ``to appropriately 
        identify'' and inserting ``shall require the use of the United 
        States flag to appropriately identify''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(c) Limitation on Branding.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), no 
program identified through the use of the United States flag may bear 
the logo, insignia, or flag of any other country or any agency or 
instrumentality of any other country unless the President--
            ``(1) determines that such recognition of the other country 
        is in the national security interest of the United States; and
            ``(2) submits to Congress a written justification for such 
        determination not later than 30 days after the date on which 
        such determination takes effect.''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 21, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 13297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5104]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Bureau of Customs and Border Protection

[CBP Dec. 07-07]


Re-Accreditation and Re-Approval of Inspectorate America 
Corporation as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory

AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of re-approval of Inspectorate America Corporation of 
Penuelas, Puerto Rico, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 
151.13, Inspectorate America Corporation, Bo. Encarnacion 127 KM 19.1, 
Tallaboa-Penuelas, Puerto Rico 00624, has been re-approved to gauge 
petroleum and petroleum products, organic chemicals and vegetable oils, 
and to test petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes, in 
accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 151.13. Anyone 
wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analysis or gauger 
services should request and receive written assurances from the entity 
that it is accredited or approved by the Bureau of Customs and Border 
Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. 
Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific tests or gauger 
services this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be 
directed to the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection by calling 
(202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/import/operations_support/labs_ scientific--svcs/org--and--
operations.xml.

DATES: The re-approval of Inspectorate America Corporation as a 
commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on September 6, 2006. 
The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for September 
2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene J. Bondoc, Ph.D, or Randall 
Breaux, Laboratories and Scientific Services, Bureau of Customs and 
Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, 
Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060.

    Dated: March 15, 2007.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
 [FR Doc. E7-5104 Filed 3-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
No. 61922.

#### S. W. Heim & Co. *v.*United States,

protests 13776-K, etc. (New York).

*551Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *E. C. Carter & Son, Inc.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 368, C. D. 1889), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
OT/OG/2011 14;0T FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS @l001/002 

U.S. DEPARTMENT O F TRANSPORTATION 0 

Office of Hearings 

Washington, D.C. '"'^ ^' 55 

^ ^ RECEIV^:C 

jUKi 2 S 2Stt 

Shane K Nissen 

FAA DOCKET NO. CP04GL0001 

(EIR2002-GL.31.0034) HEARING DOCKET 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

Administrative LHW Judge Richiird C. Goodwin 

Agency Withdrawal of Complaint 

The Agency Attorney hereby notifies Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin that 

the Agency hereby withdrav^s its Complaint in this matter and asks that the matter be dismissed. 

Tlie undersigned believes an explanation i.s appropriate given the strong factual basis the Agency 

had for bringing the case. 

According to a California Prisoner Locator, the Respondent is still incarcerated within the 

State of California prison system. His incarceration started in 2002. Currently he is shown as an 

inmate at the Corcoran facilit>', inmate number CDCR #T76107. Although we have not been 

able to update this information recently, last fall we were told that he is not scheduled to be 

released until 2017. The cost to the Agency to keep this matter open out weighs any potential 

civil penally that the taxpayers may realize from a very long term prison inmate. Consequently, 

it is felt that the Respondent having spent the last 9 years in jail, any penalty we can assess would 

be inconsequential in deterring him from future bad acts if the jail time does not do it. 

Dated this 20"* day of June 2011. 

Chris G. Zuralcs 

Senior Attorney 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Great Lakes Region, AGL-7K 

2300 East Devon Avenue 

Des Plaines, TT. 60018 

Phone: (847)294-7713 

Fax: (847) 294-7498 
07/08/201 1 14:07 FAX 2024935142 FAA + DMS 2)002/00 2 

Certificate of Service 

I hereby certify that the foregoing Agency Withdrawal of Complaint has been mailed this day 

by First Class Mail to: 

Original and One Copy: 

Hearing Docket 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attn: Mearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building - Room 2014 

One Copy to: 

Shane Kyle Nissen T-76107 

P.O. Box 8800 

Corcoran, CA 93212-8309 

One Copy to: 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E., Room E-12-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

Telephone: (202) 366-2139 Attorney Advisor 

(202) 366-2139 Legal Assistant 

Fax: (202)366-7536 

Dated this 20* day of June 2011. 

Tammy Gardner 

Legal Technician 

F A A Great Lakes