alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

MALIBU MEDIA, LLC, )

)

Plaintiff, ) Civil Case No. 2:13-cv-00085-JVB-JEM

)

v. )

)

JOHN DOE subscriber assigned IP address )

98.193.122.65, )

)

Defendant. )

)

PLAINTIFF’S AMENDED FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN

WHICH IT HAS TO EFFECTUATE SERVICE ON DEFENDANT

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), Plaintiff, Malibu Media, LLC (“Plaintiff”), moves for

entry of an order extending the time within which to effectuate service on Defendant, and states:

1. This is a copyright infringement case originally against a John Doe Defendant

known to Plaintiff only by an IP address. Plaintiff obtained Defendant’s identity by way of a

third party subpoena issued to Defendant’s Internet Service Provider (“ISP”).

2. On May 9, 2013, Plaintiff was granted leave to serve a third party subpoena on

Defendant’s ISP, Comcast Cable, to obtain the Defendant’s identifying information [CM/ECF 9].

Plaintiff issued the subpoena on or about May 9, 2013, and received the ISP’s response on June

24, 2013. Pursuant to the Court’s order, neither undersigned, Plaintiff, nor Plaintiff’s

representatives have contacted Defendant. The sentence in the original motion to the contrary

was inaccurate. See Declaration of Paul Nicoletti, attached hereto as “Exhibit A.”

3. On July 10, 2013, Plaintiff mailed a proposed summons to the Clerk, containing

the Defendant’s information which was provided to Plaintiff by the ISP. To date, Plaintiff has

not received the Clerk issued-summons to serve on the Defendant.

case 2:13-cv-00085-JVB-JEM document 16 filed 07/18/13 page 1 of 2
2

4. Pursuant to Rule 4(m), Plaintiff is required to effectuate service on Defendant by

no later than Friday, July 5, 2013. As Plaintiff has not yet received the summons to serve on the

Defendant, it has unable to serve him by the current deadline.

5. Procedurally, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the time within which it has to

effectuate service of the summons and Complaint on Defendant be extended by thirty (30) days,

or until August 5, 2013.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the time within which it has to

effectuate service of the summons and Complaint on Defendant be extended until August 5,

2013. A proposed order is attached for the Court’s convenience.

Dated: July 18, 2013

Respectfully submitted,

NICOLETTI & ASSOCIATES, PLLC

By: /s/ Paul J. Nicoletti

Paul J. Nicoletti, Esq. (P44419)

36880 Woodward Ave, Suite 100

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304

Tel: (248) 203-7800

Fax: (248) 203-7801

E-Fax: (248) 928-7051

Email: paul@nicoletti-associates.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on July 18, 2013, I electronically filed the foregoing document with

the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF and that service was perfected on all counsel of record and

interested parties through this system.

By: /s/ Paul J. Nicoletti

case 2:13-cv-00085-JVB-JEM document 16 filed 07/18/13 page 2 of 2
Skip to main content
          Skip to FDA Search
          Skip to in this section menu
          Skip to footer links


U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government

					Here’s how you know
          			Dot gov**The .gov means it’s official.**Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.
							      SSL**The site is secure.** The **https://** ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely. 
			U.S. Food and Drug Administration
				
        Search
            Menu
							
						Search FDA
									
									Submit search 
		Featured
							Contact FDA
	                FDA Guidance Documents
	                Recalls, Market Withdrawals and Safety Alerts
	                Press Announcements
	                Warning Letters
	                Advisory Committees
	                En Español

					Products
            Food
							Drugs
							Medical Devices
							Radiation-Emitting Products
							Vaccines, Blood, and Biologics
							Animal and Veterinary
							Cosmetics
							Tobacco ProductsTopics
            About FDA
							Combination Products
							Regulatory Information
							Safety
							Emergency Preparedness
							International Programs
							News and Events
							Training and Continuing Education
							Inspections and Compliance
							Science and ResearchInformation For
            Consumers
	            Patients
	            Industry
	            Health Professionals
	            Federal, State and Local Officials 
 In this section:

                FDA Continuing Education Programs

FDA Continuing Education Programs Home
          Training and Continuing Education
          FDA Continuing Education Programs
          Web-based Enduring MaterialsFDA Continuing Education Programs Web-based Enduring Materials
  
  	
    Share
    Post
    Linkedin

    Email
    PrintWoman on laptopEnduring materials are provided in various formats including on-demand videos, audio recordings and slide presentations. Publicly-available enduring materials can be accessed through the CE Portal.

To access the courses listed below, go to the CE Portal to log in and navigate to the Web-based Courses tab.

**CE Portal**

                                                                                  Content current as of:
      11/20/2023FDA Continuing Education Programs
 
 Footer Links
    FDA Archive
          About FDA
          Accessibility
      Visitor Information
          Website Policies / Privacy
          No FEAR Act
          Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
      FOIA
          HHS.gov
          USA.gov
    Contact FDA
      Follow FDA on Facebook
      Follow FDA on X
      Follow FDA on Instagram
      Follow FDA on LinkedIn
      View FDA videos on YouTube
      Subscribe to FDA RSS feeds
    FDA Homepage
    Contact Number
      1-888-INFO-FDA (1-888-463-6332) Back toTop
David Buford GREENE, petitioner, v. Bobby SHEARIN, Warden, et al.

No. 12-8607.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Markeith LOYD, et al., petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 13-6663.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 4, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Horacio LAGUNAS-BALTAZAR, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES

Juan Jesus Acevedo-Gallegos, petitioner, v. United States; Lavarry Joseph Carter, petitioner, v. United States; and Adan Gomez, petitioner, v. United States.

No. 12-9343.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Motion for Rehearing Granted, Memorandum Opinion filed September 17, 2013, 

Withdrawn, Appeal Reinstated, and Order filed November 7, 

2013.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00585-CV

____________

DENNIS SHAVER, Appellant

V.

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA AS TRUSTEE FOR NCBT 2008-1, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court

Waller County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. C12-102

ORDER

On September 17, 2013, this court issued an opinion dismissing this appeal. 

On September 26, 2013, appellant filed a motion for rehearing. The motion is 

GRANTED. 

This court’s opinion filed September 17, 2013, is WITHDRAWN, and our 

judgment of that date is VACATED. The appeal is ordered REINSTATED. 
Appellant’s brief is due thirty days from the date of this order.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Brown, Christopher, and Donovan. (Brown, J. not 

participating).
[Cite as In re A.R.R., 130 Ohio St.3d 261, 2011-Ohio-5346.]

I N RE A.R.R. [Cite as In re A.R.R., 130 Ohio St.3d 261, 2011-Ohio-5346.] Cause remanded for application of State v. Williams

.

(No. 2011-1027—Submitted September 20, 2011—Decided October 20, 2011.) A PPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Ross County, No. 10CA3159, 2011-Ohio-1186.

_________________ {¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted. {¶ 2} The cause is remanded for application of State v. Williams , 129 Ohio St.3d 344, 2011-Ohio-3374, 952 N.E.2d 1108. O’C ONNOR , C.J., and P FEIFER , L UNDBERG S TRATTON , L ANZINGER , C UPP , and M C G EE B ROWN , JJ., concur. O’D ONNELL , J., dissents.

__________________ Michael M. Ater, Ross County Prosecuting Attorney, and Robert C. Hess, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender , and Amanda J. Powell, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

______________________
Andrena D. CROCKETT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9071.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,146
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,960
<ALLOWANCES>                                       992
<INVENTORY>                                     11,473
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,889
<PP&E>                                          55,482
<DEPRECIATION>                                (37,532)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  60,648
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           19,528
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            80
<OTHER-SE>                                      39,892
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    60,648
<SALES>                                         32,540
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,540
<CGS>                                           21,859
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,859
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,329)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (64)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,265)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,265)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.70)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 35
                                  ----------


                         COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.


                             OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE
                    ANNUAL STATEMENT OF THE MASTER SERVICER


                                  CWHEQ, INC.
             CWHEQ REVOLVING HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST, SERIES 2007-G
         REVOLVING HOME EQUITY LOAN ASSET BACKED NOTES, SERIES 2007-G


         The undersigned does hereby certify that the undersigned is an
officer of Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (the "Master Servicer"), and does
hereby further certify pursuant to Section 3.09 of the Sale and Servicing
Agreement for the above-captioned Series (the "Agreement") that:

(i) A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year and of the performance of the Master Servicer under the
Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

(ii) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer
has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material
respects throughout such calendar year.




/s/ Craig Baingo                                         Dated: March 14, 2008
-----------------

Craig Baingo
Executive Vice President, Finance
<PAGE>

                                                        2ND QUARTER 2005 DRAFT 1

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                          TEXTRON FINANCIAL CORPORATION

                            CERTIFICATION 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 Textron Financial Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the Date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ted R.
French, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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 results of operations of the Company.

                                    Textron Financial Corporation

Date: August 8, 2005                /s/ Ted R. French
                                    ------------------------------------
                                    Ted R. French
                                    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

                                       31
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 127 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2024 

Received 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol 

Visitor Center for the unveiling of a statue of Martha 

Hughes Cannon. 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), 

3 SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR THE UN4 VEILING OF MARTHA HUGHES CANNON STAT5 UE. 

6 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—Emancipation Hall in the 

7 Capitol Visitor Center is authorized to be used for an 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

HCON 127 RDS 

1 event on December 11, 2024, to unveil a statue of Martha 

2 Hughes Cannon. 

3 (b) PREPARATIONS.—Physical preparations for the 

4 conduct of the event described in subsection (a) shall be 

5 carried out in accordance with such conditions as may be 

6 prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 23, 

2024. 

Attest: KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, 

Clerk. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
* Pursuant to 5TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED July 3, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-10651 Summary Calendar

CHRISTOPHER JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus RAMOS, Lieutenant, Smith Unit; V.R. RAMIREZ, Correctional Officer, Smith Unit; DAVIS, Captain, Smith Unit; FONDREN, Assistant Warden, Smith Unit; GENTRY, Major, Smith Unit; GARZA, Captain, Smith Unit; C.C. BELL, Warden; JAMIE BAKER, Assistant Regional Director, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:06-CV-94

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Christopher Jones, Texas prisoner # 656546, appeals from the district court’s dismissal with prejudice as frivolous of his complaint purportedly filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 241. We review the district court’s dismissal for abuse of discretion.
See Siglar v. Hightower , 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997). Jones contends that numerous employees at the prisonNo. 06-10651 -2- facility engaged in a conspiracy against him for filing inmate grievances. Jones sought relief under a criminal statute. See § 241; United States v. Bigham , 812 F.2d 943, 945 (5th Cir. 1987). The decision whether or not to bring criminal charges rests solely with the prosecutor. See Bigham , 812 F.2d at 945; United States v. Carter , 953 F.2d 1449, 1462 (5th Cir. 1992); see also Oliver v. Collins , 914 F.2d 56, 60 (5th Cir. 1990). Accordingly, Jones has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing his claims against the defendants as frivolous. See Siglar , 112 F.3d at 193. Jones’s appeal is without arguable merit and is thus frivolous. See Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, we dismiss his appeal as frivolous. 5TH C IR . R. 42.2. The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous and the district court’s dismissal of Jones’s complaint as frivolous count as two strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v.
Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 385-87 (5th Cir. 1996). Jones is warned that if he accumulates three strikes under § 1915(g), he will not be able to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.
See § 1915(g). APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

PASCAL BOKAR THIAM, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

FILLMORE PROPERTIES, L.L.C., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 05-01874 JSW

ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS’

NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

On November 20, 2006, Plaintiffs filed a request to withdraw their opposition to

Defendants’ pending motion to dismiss and to file a statement of non-opposition to the motion. 

In the alternative, Plaintiffs sought “an Order to Dismiss At Plaintiffs’ Instance.” In the

documents attached to Plaintiffs’ request, Plaintiffs indicate that the dismissal should be with

prejudice. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a), “an action may be dismissed by

the plaintiff without order of court ... by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before service by

the adverse party of an answer or of a motion for summary judgment.” No answer or motion for

summary judgment has been filed yet by Defendants in this action. Accordingly, the Court

construes Plaintiffs’ request as a notice of dismissal. Pursuant the notice, the action is dismissed

with prejudice and the Clerk is directed to close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 28, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1536 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1536

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain synthetic staple fibers that 
        are carded, combed, or otherwise processed for spinning.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 8, 2005

  Mr. Coble introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the duty on certain synthetic staple fibers that 
        are carded, combed, or otherwise processed for spinning.

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

SECTION 1. ACRYLIC OR MODACRYLIC SYNTHETIC STAPLE FIBERS, CARDED, 
              COMBED, OR OTHERWISE PROCESSED FOR SPINNING.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.06.43       Synthetic staple   Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         fibers, carded,                                                    31/2008
                         combed, or
                         otherwise
                         processed for
                         spinning: acrylic
                         or modacrylic
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         5506.30.00)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 26070]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11936]



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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs
[Public Notice 2205]


Policy on Munitions Export Licenses to Ecuador and Peru

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Public notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Sections 38 and 42 of the Arms Export Control Act, 
notice is hereby given that it is the policy of the United States to 
deny all requests for licenses and other approvals to export or 
otherwise transfer lethal items to Ecuador or Peru. Other defense 
articles and defense services to Ecuador or Peru will be reviewed on a 
case-by-case basis. The suspension on non-lethal defense articles and 
services is lifted.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 16, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Kavanagh, Office of Export Control Policy, Bureau of 
Political-Military Affairs, Department of State (202-647-4231).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective immediately, it is the policy of 
the U.S. Government to deny all requests for licenses and approvals to 
authorize the export or other transfer of lethal items to Ecuador or 
Peru. Other defense articles and defense services to Peru will be 
reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The suspension on non-lethal defense 
articles and services is lifted.
    The licenses and approvals subject to this policy include 
manufacturing licenses, technical assistance agreements, technical 
data, and commercial military exports of any kind involving Ecuador or 
Peru and which are subject to controls under the Arms Export Control 
Act. This policy also prohibits the use in connection with Ecuador or 
Peru of any exemptions from licensing or other approval requirements 
included in the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 
CFR parts 120-130) with the exception of those exemptions specified in 
Sec. 126.1(a), unless a specific written exception is provided by the 
Office of Defense Trade Controls.
    This action has been taken pursuant to Secs. 38 and 42 of the Arms 
Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778, 2791) and Sec. 126.7 of the ITAR in 
furtherance of the foreign policy of the United States.

    Dated: May 4, 1995.
Thomas E. McNamara,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Department 
of State.
[FR Doc. 95-11936 Filed 5-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-25-M
Fidel Perez GONI, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 12-9543.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
Anthony LeRoy DAVIS, petitioner, v. HUDSON REFINERY, et al.

No. 12-8286.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied.