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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.17-cv-00939-WHA (JSC)

ORDER REGARDING PROPOSED 

REDACTIONS TO ORDER RE: 

WAYMO’S MOTION TO COMPEL

The Court has filed its Order regarding Waymo’s Motion to Compel. (Dkt. No. 549.) It 

filed the Order under seal to give the parties the opportunity to propose and justify redactions, if 

any, to the Order. The Court has also ruled on what parts of the Term Sheet can be redacted. 

(Dkt. No. 550.) The parties shall have until noon on Wednesday, June 7, 2017 to suggest 

redactions, if any, to the Court’s Motion to Compel Order. The redacted version will then be 

made public. Redactions should be proposed only where truly necessary and should be accessed 

on a word by word basis. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 5, 2017

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 551 Filed 06/05/17 Page 1 of 1
October 26, 2017

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ARMANDO CASTILLO, Appellant

NO. 14-16-00296-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
HIEU DOAN TRUONG, petitioner, v. OREGON.

No. 12-9024.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

*2033Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Oregon denied.
yt ax uy ft ven aed al

os

>

Si
4 ae fear 4 aoe om aed en afd oT aT 4 orm wy wen aie vet A ea ger] F Gran en fe 8 wear a
or Prod &, 4 ue 4 we al WoT ge fee ver & fora fo A wee fer on) ¥ oar en far

orefe 4 amr oRae & wer vet seer wae fear ar) we Caer | Ora ATOM aa, GAM GIT _ Fw fra site srvay
ak ar fora otk ort aaa & feet or ate a
ar ferar|

ores Fad GT SF, Rfery AA Gea Gf GR sat FH a
fear

\||[ ctoseo
FOR

|| ||BusiNess |

Be Ue, Sree MAT S sa aor fear an! ae aga SK WS oa 4 dae of ah AR ger RN Ta HO B99 aT Aa aed) we are om fee at ear He aes on, yt Ue we et wa aT!
Tra | onfarare Se saci wat A cre a | iri of 4 dpi ged Ey Sar) waned faery 4 ae wa gp te wea | wife Ee wa & fey weve we ay fear
welts Fe Gr (TI Tar at, ge eh 44 a fre oer orectt tary afen 4 aga uftrer a

eae alal a Great ot) afe ag drae & al ae we et WS ims
Brian Lamark CUFFIE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-2460

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 18, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
Marcus JACKSON, petitioner, v. Linda M. METRISH, Warden.

No. 12-8568.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 22075]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11003]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE


Correction to Notice of Lodging a Final Judgment by Consent 
Pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and 
Liability Act (CERCLA)

    Notice of the lodging of a proposed consent decree in United States 
versus Edward Azrael, et al., Civ. A. No. WN-89-2898, was published at 
60 Fed. Reg. 19772 on April 20, 1995. The decree was lodged on April 
10, 1995, with the United States District Court for the District of 
Maryland. The complaint in the action seeks recovery of costs and 
injunctive relief under Sections 106 and 107(a) of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (``CERCLA''), as 
amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, 
Pub. L. 99-499, 42 U.S.C. 9606, 9607(a).
    The Azrael case involves the Kane and Lombard Superfund Site 
located in Baltimore, Maryland. Under the proposed consent decree, 
Edward Azrael, Harriet Azrael and the Estate of Cele Landay (the 
``Settlors'') will pay $325,000.00 to the United States and $175,000.00 
to the State of Maryland toward reimbursement of past and future costs 
incurred by the United States and the State of Maryland in performing 
certain response actions at the Kane and Lombard Superfund Site. The 
notice of lodging published April 20, 1995, had mistakenly stated that 
the Settlors were to pay $375,000.00 to the United States.
    The Department of Justice will receive comments relating to the 
proposed consent decree for a period of thirty days from April 20, 
1995, the date of Notice of Lodging was originally published. Comments 
should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General of the 
Environment and Natural Resources Division, Department of Justice, P.O. 
Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, D.C. 20044, and should 
refer to United States versus Edward Azrael, et al., DOJ Reference No. 
90-11-2-299.
    The proposed consent decree may be examined at the Office of the 
United States Attorney for the District of Maryland, U.S. Courthouse, 
Eighth Floor, 101 W. Lombard Street, Baltimore, Md. 21201; Region III 
Office of the Environmental Protection Agency, 841 Chestnut Street, 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and at the Consent Decree Library, 1120 
``G'' Street NW., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005, (202) 624-0892. A 
copy of the proposed decree may be obtained in person or by mail from 
the Consent Decree Library at the address listed above. In requesting a 
copy, please refer to the referenced case and number, and enclose a 
check in the amount of $6.75 (25 cents per page reproduction costs), 
payable to the Consent Decree Library.
Joel M. Gross,
Acting Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environmental 
and Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 95-11003 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;

OTTOMOTTO LLC; and OTTO

TRUCKING LLC,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER SHORTENING TIME

TO BRIEF MOTION FOR

RELIEF

On October 27, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Corley granted plaintiff Waymo LLC’s

request to compel production of any drafts of the due diligence report prepared by non-party

Stroz Friedberg (Dkt. No. 2128). Defendants Uber Technologies, Inc., and Ottomotto LLC

filed a motion for relief from that order pursuant to Civil Local Rule 72 (Dkt. No. 2152). The

deadline for responses is advanced from November 13 to NOVEMBER 2 AT NOON. The deadline

for any reply is advanced from November 20 to NOVEMBER 3 AT NOON. Only the challenged

portion of Judge Corley’s October 27 order is STAYED pending resolution of this motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 31, 2017. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 2157 Filed 10/31/17 Page 1 of 1
Emanuel Peter WATSON, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 12-7668.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, denied.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

333 Bush Street

34th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94104

415.433.1940

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

Case No. 5:17-cv-00832-LHK STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 

PREJDUCE

Daniel S. Brome, CA SBN 287915

dbrome@nka.com

NICHOLS KASTER, LLP

235 Montgomery Street, Suite 810

San Francisco, CA 94104

Telephone: (415) 277-7235

Facsimile: (415) 277-7238

Rachhana T. Srey, MN Bar No. 340133 

Admitted pro hac vice

NICHOLS KASTER, LLP

4600 IDS Center

80 South 8th Street

Minneapolis, MN 55402

Telephone: (612) 256-3200

Facsimile: (612) 215-6870

Attorneys for Plaintiff

WILLIAM SCEPKOWSKI, on behalf of himself 

and all others similarly situated

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

WILLIAM SCEPKOWSKI, on behalf of 

himself and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

NOVA MEASURING INSTRUMENTS 

INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 5:17-cv-00832-LHK

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

Complaint Filed: February 20, 2017

Trial Date: No date set.

Case 5:17-cv-00832-LHK Document 25 Filed 06/21/17 Page 1 of 2
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

333 Bush Street

34th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94104

415.433.1940

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

Case No. 5:17-cv-00832-LHK

2. STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties to this action through their 

designated counsel that the above-captioned action be and hereby is dismissed without prejudice 

pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1).

Respectfully submitted, 

DATED: June 21, 2017 By: /s/ Rachhana T. Srey

DANIEL S. BROME

RACHANA T. SREY, pro hac vice

NICHOLS KASTER, LLP

Attorneys for Plaintiff

WILLIAM SCEPKOWSKI, on behalf of 

himself and others similarly situated

DATED: June 21, 2017 By: /s/ Joseph A. Schwachter

JOSEPH A. SCHWACHTER PHILIP B. BALDWIN

ANDREW J. VOSS, pro hac vice

LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

Attorneys for Defendant

NOVA MEASURING INSTRUMENTS INC.

ATTESTATION

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-1(i)(3), this is to attest that Defendant’s counsel, Joseph 

Schwachter, has authorized the filer of this Stipulation to affix his signature hereto on his behalf.

Dated: June 21, 2017

/s/ Rachhana T. Srey

RACHHANA T. SREY

Case 5:17-cv-00832-LHK Document 25 Filed 06/21/17 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT
32.1














CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002








In
connection with the Report of Great Spirits, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Dana
Hyde , Chief Executive and Financial 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:





(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 Company.


Date: September 23, 2008
              By:
              /s/ Dana HydeDana
      Hyde
                Chief
      Executive Officer and
                Chief
      Financial Officer
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 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

PHILLIP FRANTIN, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

SUNBEAM PRODUCTS, INC., et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 17-cv-00894-SI (SI) 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL UPON 

SETTLEMENT 

 The parties to the action, by their counsel, have advised the court that they have agreed to 

a settlement. 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 

However, that if any party hereto certifies to this court, with proof of service of a copy thereon on 

opposing counsel, within ninety days from the date hereof, that settlement has not in fact occurred, 

the foregoing order shall be vacated and this cause shall forthwith be restored to the calendar for 

further proceedings. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 

______________________________________ 

SUSAN ILLSTON 

United States District Judge
III 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 9 

Notifying the House of Representatives of the election of a President pro 

tempore. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 20, 2021 

Mr. SCHUMER submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Notifying the House of Representatives of the election of 

a President pro tempore. 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives be noti2 fied of the election of the Honorable Patrick J. Leahy as 

3 President of the Senate pro tempore. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Judy HOTCHKISS, petitioner, v. CLAY TOWNSHIP BOARD, et al.

No. 12-8792.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
Kenneth Tyler SCOTT, et al., petitioners, v. SAINTS JOHN'S CHURCH IN THE WILDERNESS, et al.

No. 12-1077.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Colorado denied.
exv10w15






EXHIBIT
10.15




Supplemental Deferral Terms for Deferred Long-Term Incentive Awards and Deferred Variable Compensation

Awards (409A Supplement)




					
	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Affected Plans

	 	Equity and Incentive Plan	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Stock Performance Plan	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Variable Compensation Plan	 	 
	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Affected Amounts

	 	Amounts deferred under the Affected Plans in taxable
years before 2009; provided, however, that such
amounts were not: (i) earned and vested before January
1, 2005; and (ii) paid to a participant on or before
December 31, 2008. For purposes of this paragraph, a
right to an amount is earned and vested only if the
amount is not subject to a substantial risk of
forfeiture for purposes of Section 409A of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and the
rulings and regulations issued thereunder
(collectively, “Code Section 409A”).	 	 
	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Payment Events

	 	To the extent that an amount is payable in connection
with a participant’s retirement or other separation
from service, no amounts shall be paid hereunder on
account thereof unless such retirement or separation
from service constitutes a separation from service
within the meaning of Code Section 409A.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	At death, all deferred amounts will be delivered
promptly to the person(s) specified in the last
designation form filed with the Company. If no
designation form has been completed, delivery will be
made to participant’s estate.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	If a participant elected to defer an amount to a
specified calendar year, such amount shall be paid
promptly at the beginning of such year, but no later
than the last day of that year.	 	 
	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	Specified Employees

	 	In no event shall amounts be paid or delivered, on
account of a separation from service, to a “specified
employee”, as that term is defined within Code Section
409A, earlier than the date that six months after
that specified employee’s separation from service.
Amounts otherwise payable during such six month period
shall be paid on the date that is six months and one
day after the participant’s separation from service.
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas September 12, 2022 No. 04-22-00581-CV IN THE INTEREST OF E.E.G. AND E.K.M. , Children From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019-EM5-00713 Honorable Martha Tanner, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R The clerk’s record was due on August 29, 2022, but the notice of appeal was not filed with the Bexar County District Clerk until September 7, 2022. After the due date, the Bexar County District Clerk filed a notification of late record requesting additional time to file the record until November 7, 2022. The request is GRANTED IN PART. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 35.3(c) (limiting any extension to thirty days). The clerk’s record is due on September 28, 2022.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 12th day of September, 2022.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 120 Received in Senate (RDS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 120

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 24, 2024

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
 for a ceremony as part of the unveiling of the statue of Johnny Cash, 
                   provided by the State of Arkansas.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR A CEREMONY AS PART OF THE 
              UNVEILING OF THE STATUE OF JOHNNY CASH.

    (a) Authorization.--Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
is authorized to be used on September 24, 2024, for a ceremony as part 
of the unveiling

              

 of the statue of Johnny Cash, provided by the State of Arkansas.
    (b) Preparations.--Physical preparations for the ceremony described 
in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance with such 
conditions as the Architect of the Capitol may prescribe.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 23, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Charles WILLIAMS, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-6267.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 29, 2004.

Decided May 6, 2004.

Charles Williams, Appellant pro se. Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Charles Williams appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for return of property filed pursuant to Fed. R.Crim.P. 41. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See United States v. Williams,*No. CR-00-8 (E.D.Va. Dec. 22, 2003). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are *163adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 10, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24792-24793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11459]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Public Land Order 7141

[UT-942-1430-01; UTU-42967, UTU-42983]


Revocation of Secretarial Orders Dated October 28, 1921, and 
February 27, 1934; Utah

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Public Land Order.

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

SUMMARY: This order revokes two Secretarial Orders in their entireties 
that withdrew 80 acres of public land for powersite classification 
purposes. The land is no longer required for powersite purposes. The 
land will be opened to surface entry. The land has been open to mining 
under the provisions of the Mining Claims Rights Restoration Act of 
1955, and these provisions are no longer required. The land has been 
and will remain open to mineral leasing.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 9, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl Fridberg, BLM Utah State Office, 
P.O. Box 45155, Salt Lake City, Utah 84145, 801-539-4101.
    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior 
by section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 
43 U.S.C. 1714 (1988), it is hereby ordered as follows: [[Page 24793]] 
    1. The Secretarial Orders dated February 27, 1934, which 
established Powersite Classification No. 283, and October 28, 1921, 
which established Powersite Classification No. 16, are hereby revoked 
in their entireties for the following described land:

Salt Lake Meridian

T. 13 S., R. 5 E.,
    Sec. 31, SE\1/4\NE\1/4\ and NE\1/4\SE\1/4\.

    The area described contains 80 acres in Sanpete County.

    2. The State of Utah has a preference right for public highway 
rights-of-way or material sites for a period of 90 days from the date 
of publication of this order and any location, entry, selection, or 
subsequent patent shall be subject to any rights granted the State as 
provided by the Act of June 10, 1920, 16 U.S.C. 818 (1988).
    3. At 9 a.m. on August 9, 1995, the land described in paragraph 1 
shall be opened to operation of the public land laws generally, subject 
to valid existing rights, the provisions of existing withdrawals, other 
segregations of record, and the requirements of applicable law. All 
valid applications received at or prior to 9 a.m. on August 9, 1995, 
shall be considered as simultaneously filed at that time. Those 
received thereafter shall be considered in the order of filing.
    The land described in paragraph 1 has been open to mining under the 
provisions of the Mining Claims Rights Restoration Act of 1955, and 
these provisions are no longer required.

    Dated: April 21, 1995.
Bob Armstrong,
Assistant Secretary of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 95-11459 Filed 5-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-P