alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case *No.*13,202.

#### SPANISH CONSUL’S PETITION.

[1 Ben. 225.) 1

District Court, S. D. New York.

June, 1867.

Witness — Foreign Commission — Power of the Court to Summon.

1. Where a commission was issued by a judge in Cuba to the Spanish consul in New York to take testimony to be used in a criminal prosecution for swindling, and the consul thereupon applied to the district court for a summons to compel the witness to appear and testify: *Held,*that the only provisions made by congress on the subject of enforcing the giving of testimony in judicial proceedings pending in a foreign country, are found in the acts of March 2, 1855 (10 Stat. 630), and of March 3, 1863 (12 Stat. 769).

2. Neither of those acts applied to this ease, and the court had no power to issue the summons asked for.

Coudert Bros., for petitioner.

BLATCHPORD, District Judge.

The petitioner, who is the consul of her majesty the Queen of Spain at the port of New York, represents that he has received from the judge of the Southern district of Santiago, in the island of Cuba, a commission, empowering him to take the testimony of certain witnesses named therein, to be used in a criminal prosecution for swindling, a translation of which commission he produces, and he prays that a summons may be issued by me requiring the witnesses to attend and testify. I have no power to issue the summons asked for. The only provisions made by congress, on the subject of enforcing the giving of testimony in judicial proceedings pending in a foreign country, are those found in the act of March 2, 1S55 (10 Stat. 630, § 2), and in the act of March 3, 1863 (12 Stat. 769). The former provides that “where letters rog-atory shall have been addressed from any court of a foreign country to any circuit court of the United States, and a United States commissioner designated by said circuit court to make the examination of witnesses in said letters mentioned, said commissioner shall be empowered to compel the witnesses to appear and depose in the same manner as to appear and testify .in court.” The latter act is confined to the taking of testimony to be used in a suit for the recovery of money or property depending in a court of a country with which the United States are at peace, and in which the government of such foreign country is a party or has an interest. The prayer of the petition is denied.
No. 57357.

protest 198404-K (New York).

#### Willey Biggin Wool Service, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

An examination of the official papers failing to disclose any reason for disturbing the action of the collector, which was presumptively correct, the protest was overruled.
**Exhibit 3.1****RIO VISTA GP LLC****FIRST AMENDMENT TO****AMENDED AND RESTATED LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT**THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT of Rio VistaGP LLC (this “First Amendment”) is dated as of October 6, 2006. Capitalized terms used, and nototherwise defined, herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Amended and RestatedLimited Liability Company Agreement dated as of September 16, 2004 (the “Restated Agreement”) ofRio Vista GP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Company”).WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 13.8 of the Restated Agreement, the Board of Managersbelieves that it is in the best interests of the Company and the Members to amend the RestatedAgreement on the terms set forth herein.NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Managers hereby adopts the following amendments to the RestatedAgreement:1. Amendment of Section 2.7 of the Restated Agreement. Section 2.7 of the RestatedAgreement is hereby amended to read, in full, as follows:“Richard R. Canney, Charles C. Handly and Ian T. Bothwell are hereby designated as authorizedpersons to execute, deliver and file any amendments or restatements of the Certificate, and anyother certificates and any amendments or restatements thereof necessary for the Company to qualifyto do business in a jurisdiction in which the Company may wish to conduct business.”2. Amendment of Section 5.2 of the Restated Agreement. Section 5.2(l) of the RestatedAgreement is hereby amended to read, in full, as follows:"(l) Compensation of Managers; Reimbursement of Expenses.The Managers shall receive for their services such compensation as may be determined from timeto time by the Board of Managers. Compensation may include, without limitation, cash, common unitsof Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and/or options to purchase suchcommon units. No Manager who is also an officer or employee of the Company shall be entitled toreceive additional compensation for his services as a Manager. Managers (including Managers whoare also officers or employees of the Company) shall be reimbursed by the Company for theirreasonable travel, food, lodging and other expenses incurred in attending meetings in accordancewith policies approved from time to time by the Board of Managers.”3. Effect of This Amendment. Except as expressly provided in this Amendment, theRestated Agreement is reaffirmed and remains in full force and effect.
 

 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the members of the Board of Managers have executed this First Amendment toAmended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of Rio Vista GP LLC as of the day and yearfirst set forth above.**BOARD OF MANAGERS**:/s/ Richard R. Canney Richard R. Canney/s/ Murray J. Feiwell Murray J. Feiwell/s/ Douglas G. Manner Douglas G. Manner
1/28/2016 What causes fish kills? Water science questions and answers, from the USGS Water Science School

http://water.usgs.gov/edu/qa­chemical­fishkills.html 1/1

The USGS Water Science School

So many fish in Narragansett Bay swam into the warm, lowoxygen shallow waters of the Bay that they used up

available dissolved oxygen and caused this mess on the

beach.

Credit: BeachChair Scientist

Search... Search

Back to previous page

Water Questions & Answers

What causes fish kills?

Many, but not all, fish kills in the

summer result from low

concentrations of dissolved

oxygen in the water. Fish, like all

other complex life forms, need

oxygen to survive. They get theirs in the form

of oxygen gas dissolved in the water. That's

why it's important to have an aeration device, a

bubbler, in your home aquarium.

Warm water holds less dissolved oxygen than

cold water, so summer is the time when fish

can have a hard time getting enough oxygen.

Other organisms use oxygen, too, including the

algae that grow in the summer and bacteria

that degrade organic matter. During the day,

the algae produce oxygen through

photosynthesis, but at night, when

photosynthesis stops, they and other organisms

keep respiring, using up oxygen.

So on warm summer nights during algal blooms, the dissolved­oxygen concentration

sometimes drops too low for the fish, and a die­off can occur. This can occur as a result of

purely natural conditions or because of human activity that results in adding nutrients, nitrogen

and phosphorus, to water systems. Nutrients come from many sources: fertilizers,

automobiles, sewage, manure, and others. An excess of nutrients tends to speed up the growth

of algae and diminish the availability of dissolved oxygen. Low dissolved oxygen can result

from other factors, too, such as poor flushing or circulation, dredging, or a sudden rain after a

dry spell.

Fish kills also can occur as a result to toxic compounds released into a body of water. In order

for this to occur, the toxic compound must be fairly highly concentrated. In a large water body

(such as the Chesapeake Bay) this would require a very large amount of the toxic compound,

and a release site fairly close to the affected fish.

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey

URL: http://water.usgs.gov/edu/qa­chemical­fishkills.html

Page ContactInformation: Howard Perlman

Page Last Modified: Friday, 07­Aug­2015 13:58:27 EDT
No. 64189.

protests 289764-K, etc. (Laredo).

#### Corrigan Dispatch Company *v.*United States,

*471Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of carrizo baskets the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Chester K. Stoner*v. *United States*(42 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2083), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7815

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JEMAREN MARVIN CONNOR,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District 

Judge. (8:01-cr-00513-DKC-1; 8:12-cv-02499-DKC)

Submitted: March 28, 2013 Decided: April 1, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jemaren Marvin Connor, Appellant Pro Se. Stuart A. Berman, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Mara Zusman Greenberg, OFFICE 

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Jemaren Marvin Connor seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 

(West Supp. 2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a 

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of 

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Connor has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 7530

CORY DELAURENCIO , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. JOHN WALRATH , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria

. Anthony John Trenga , District Judge. ( 1:16

- cv
- 00943

- AJT

- TCB )

Submitted : March 29, 2018 Decided: April 3, 2018

Before AGEE and DIAZ , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Remanded by un published per curiam opinion

.
Cory DeLaurencio, Appellant Pro Se. Eugene Paul Murphy, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opi nions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Cory DeLaurencio seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. Parties to a civil action are accorded 30 days after the entry of the district cour t’s final judgment or order to note an appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). However, the district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal if a party moves for an extension of the appeal period within 30 days after the expiration of the origin al appeal period and demonstrates excusable neglect or good cause to warrant
an extension. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5); see Washington v. Bumgarner , 882 F.2d 899,
900

- 01 (4th Cir. 1989). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdi ctional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court’s final judgment was e ntered on the docket on September 29,
2017. DeLaurencio ’s notice of appeal was dated November 6 , 2017, * and filed November 16, 2017, after expiration of the 30

- day appeal period but within the excusable neglect period. Because DeLaurencio ’s notice of appeal offered some excuse for his
untimeliness and a request to consider a “delayed” notice of appeal , we construe it as a request for an extension of time accompanying his notice of appeal. Accordingly, we remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing the district court to determine whether the time for filing a notice of appeal should be extended under Fed. R. App. P.

* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988).3 4(a)(5)(A). The record, as supplemented, will then be returned to this court for further
consideration.
REMANDED
Exhibit 3.2
                                STATE OF DELAWARE

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       of
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

First: That at a meeting of the Board of Directors of SIERRA MADRE GOLD
CORPORATION resolutions were duly adopted setting forth proposed amendments of
the Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, declaring said amendments
to be advisable and requesting a majority of the stockholders of said
corporation to give their consent in writing thereto. The resolutions setting
forth the proposed amendments are as follows:

         BE IT RESOLVED THAT, that effective October 4, 1999 the Certificate of
         Incorporation of this corporation be amended by changing the article
         thereof numbered "I" so that, as amended, said Article shall be and
         read as follows:

                                   "Article I
                                      Name

         The name of the Corporation shall be CAPITAL ONE VENTURES CORP."

Second: That thereafter, pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors, a
majority of the stockholders of said corporation gave their consent in writing
to the preceding resolutions in lieu of a meeting of stockholders pursuant to
ss.228 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

Third: That said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the provisions
ofss.242 of the General corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

Fourth: That the capital of said corporation shall not be reduced under or by
reason of said amendment.


                                    By:  /s/  Pedro Villagran-Garcia
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                            (Authorized Officer)

                                    Name:  Pedro Villagran-Garcia
#### EZRA ROSENBAUM, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, v. HANNT HAMMETT, *ET AL.,*DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

*Messrs. Levy, Lemlcen & Margulies*and *Mr. Leo B. Mazer*for the petitioner.

*Mr. Louis Lando, Mr. Solomon Lubow*and *Mr. Robert G. Garofalo*for the respondents.

May 14, 1962.
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4994 

AN ACT 

To modify the boundary of the Vicksburg National Military 

Park in the State of Mississippi, 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 

†S 4994 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Vicksburg National 

3 Military Park Boundary Modification Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. VICKSBURG NATIONAL MILITARY PARK CONVEY5 ANCE AND BOUNDARY MODIFICATION. 

6 (a) CONVEYANCE.— 

7 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Inte8 rior (referred to in this Act as the ‘‘Secretary’’) shall 

9 convey to the State of Mississippi (referred to in this 

10 Act as the ‘‘State’’) without consideration subject to 

11 any terms and conditions that the Secretary deter12 mines to be appropriate, the Federal land described 

13 in subsection (b). 

14 (2) DESCRIPTION OF FEDERAL LAND.—The 

15 Federal land referred to in subsection (a) is the fol16 lowing: 

17 (A) The parcel of approximately 3.66 acres 

18 of National Park Service land within the bound19 ary of Vicksburg National Military Park, as de20 picted on the map entitled ‘‘VICK–2024–01’’, 

21 to be used by the State as a welcome center or 

22 other public use. 

23 (B) The approximately 6.48 acres of Na24 tional Park Service land within the boundary of 

25 Vicksburg National Mark Park, as depicted on 

26 the map entitled ‘‘VICK–2024–02’’, to be used 
3 

†S 4994 ES

1 by the State an interpretive center or a mu2 seum or other public use. 

3 (b) BOUNDARY MODIFICATION.—On conveyance of a 

4 parcel of Federal land under subsection (a), the Secretary 

5 shall modify the boundary of the Vicksburg National Mili6 tary Park to reflect the conveyance of the parcel of Fed7 eral land. 

Passed the Senate December 18 (legislative day, December 16), 2024. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4994 

AN ACT 

To modify the boundary of the Vicksburg National 

other purposes. Military Park in the State of Mississippi, and for
#### Albert T. Baxter *v.*Franklin Bell.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by Dykman, J.
#### Magic City Grocery, Inc., Claude Shanen and Roselle Shanen, *et vir,*v. Laura Knowles.

181 So. 889.

Opinion Flied June 8, 1938.

*R. P. Terry, Louis M. Jepeway, J. Velma Keen*and *A. Frank O’Kelley, Jr.,*for Appellants;

*Boone & Boone*and *Talbot Whitfield, Jr.,*for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

This appeal is from a final decree vacating the transfer of 46 shares of the capital stock of the Magic City Grocery, Inc.^from Claude Shanen, the debtor, to the Magic City Grocery, Inc., and subjecting 48/50 of the *657property standing in the name of the' Magic City Grocery, Inc., to the execution issued on a judgment at law rendered against Claude Shanen.

In material respects the evidence is not in entire accord with the allegations of the bill of complaint, which was not amended to'meet the proofs; and in material respects the relief granted by the final decree is not in entire harmony with the allegations of the bill of complaint and the evidence adduced.

The decree is reversed and the cause is remanded with leave to permit amendments to -the bill of complaint and the admission of appropriate evidence, to the end that an appropriate decree according to the law may be duly rendered.

Reversed and rema'nded for appropriate proceedings.

Whitfield, Terrell, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.
HIS TRASH. MAKE SURE YOU MAKE IT ALL THE WAY |

TO THE TRASH CAN AND NOT THE WATER! +

a
Ww
<
a
=)
O
>
v2)
fay
wm
pe
za
:
Ww
fh
©
a
oO
pd
ce
g


&
DRAW A LINE FROM THE OBJECTS THAT BELONG IN THE TRASH TO THE TRASH CAN.
ae _ DRAW A LINE FROM THE OBJECTS THAT BELONG IN THE OCEAN TO THE WATER. ‘+ MAKE SURE YOU TELL ALL YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS TO HELP OUT TOO!

/\ ee



5
CERTIFICATE

PLEDGES TO HELP PROTECT OUR
LAKES, RIVERS, STREAMS AND OCEANS
FROM POLLUTION

THE U.S. COAST GUARD SEA PARTNERS CAMPAIGN



HELP SAMMY THE SEA OTTER
KEEP OUR WATERS CLEAN

COLOR NG and ACTIVITY BOOK



THIS BOOK BELONGS TO:

Rr AR
“AAC
we eA
_— _
PS
Ss
gos
a /
x Ny 4
‘
a
Past 5
mame Sr, a
a HI, I’M SAMMY THE SEA OTTER AND THE WATER IS MY HOME.


Z-y

. . : wf |'MHERE TO ASK FOR YOUR HELP TO KEE

PES,
LEE

TILER KK
SS

SS
MELLLZEESSSSSSSSSSSED _
<1 (a
ALS

‘

P MY HOME CLEAN! WHEN YOU SEE THINGS LIKE THIS, MAKE SURE YOU PUT THEM IN THE TRASH! :
#### **Exhibit21.1**

##### **SUBSIDIARIESOF THE REGISTRANT**

| Legal name                                                        | ** ** | **Country**    |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|----------------|
| Websense UK  Limited                                              |       | United Kingdom |
| Websense Japan  KK                                                |       | Japan          |
| Websense  (Australia) Pty Limited                                 |       | Australia      |
| Websense  International Limited                                   |       | Ireland        |
| Websense  Holdings International Limited                          |       | Ireland        |
| Websense France  S.A.R.L.                                         |       | France         |
| Websense  Deutschland GmbH                                        |       | Germany        |
| Websense Italia  S.r.l.                                           |       | Italy          |
| Websense Brasil  Gerenciamento e Segurança de Internet Ltda. |       | Brazil         |
| Websense  Mauritius                                               |       | Mauritius      |
| Websense  Software Services India Private Limited                 |       | India          |
| Websense Canada,  Inc.                                            |       | Canada         |
| Websense Network  Security Technology R&D (Beijing) Co., Ltd. |       | China          |
| PortAuthority  Technologies, Inc.                                 |       | United States  |
| Port Authority  Technologies Israel Ltd.                          |       | Israel         |

 

----
No. 59056.

protest 228977-K (Los Angeles).

#### Quon Quon Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of floor coverings, composed wholly or in chief value of rush and not of grass or of rice straw, the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstracts 57889 and 57890, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
#### Jackson *v.*Philadelphia Transportation Company, Appellant.

Argued November 20, 1968.

Before Bell, C. J., Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O’Bbien and Bobeets, JJ.

*James Gonwell*Welsh, for appellant.

*George A. D’Angelo,*with him *Truseott and Eris-man,*for appellee.

January 15, 1969:

Opinion

Pee Cueiam,

Plaintiff recovered a verdict for personal injuries he sustained as a result of being struck by one of defendant’s buses. Plaintiff was working in a ditch on Columbia Avenue in Philadelphia when the rear wheel of ..a .bus drove partially over the ditch and struck plaintiff as he raised himself up to throw a shovelful of dirt out of the ditch. Defendant requests judgment n.o.v. on the grounds that defendant was not negligent and, in any event, plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.

The evidence as to defendant’s negligence and plaintiff’s contributory negligence was conflicting, and therefore the issues were for the jury.

Judgment affirmed.
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

 Moreover, on August 29, 2006, plaintiff filed a document styled as a “Notice of Error,” 1

asking the court to disregard his second amended complaint filed June 20, 2006. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID WAYNE ELMORE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2657 GEB PAN P

vs.

TOM L. CAREY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and seeking relief pursuant to 42

U.S.C. § 1983. On August 23, 2006, defendants filed a motion to stay and modify the court’s

March 22, 2006, scheduling order. In light of the court’s order filed August 24, 2006, this

motion will be denied.1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants’ August 23, 2006,

motion to stay and modify the scheduling order is denied. 

DATED: September 18, 2006.

14/elmo2657.o

Case 2:04-cv-02657-GEB-EFB Document 47 Filed 09/19/06 Page 1 of 1