alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
36 October 5, 2017 No. 53

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE AND WAREHOUSE UNION, Plaintiff,

v. PORT OF PORTLAND; Commissioners of the Port of Portland, in their individual and official capacities; Bill Wyatt, in his individual and official capacity; and Bruce A. Holte, Defendants. (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit No. 14-35376; S064608)

En Banc On certified question from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; amended certification filed January 6, 2017; certification accepted February 2, 2017. Robert H. Lavitt, Schwerin, Campbell, Barnard, Iglitzin and Lavitt, LLP, Seattle, Washington, and Andrew J. Ziaja, Leonard Carder, LLP, Oakland, California, filed the brief for plaintiff. Also on the brief was Emily M. Maglio. Randolph C. Foster, Stoel Rives LLP, Portland, filed the brief for defendants Port of Portland, Commissioners of the Port of Portland, and Bill Wyatt. Also on the brief were Jeremy D. Sacks and Crystal S. Chase. No appearance on behalf of defendant Bruce A. Holte.

PER CURIAM The Oregon Supreme Court declines to answer the certi

fied question.

Case Summary: The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified a state-law question to the Oregon Supreme Court. After the Supreme Court accepted certification, the parties filed a stipulated motion to dismiss with prejudice the court’s consideration of the certified question. Held : The court declines to answer the certified question, and no further action is necessary.
The Oregon Supreme Court declines to answer the certified question.Cite as 362 Or 36 (2017) 37

PER CURIAM
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified a state-law question to this court, which we restate as follows: Did programs financed by the Port of Portland for the benefit of private companies put tax revenues at risk in violation of Article XI, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution? After this court accepted certification, the parties advised us that they settled their dispute, and they filed a stipulated motion to “dismiss with prejudice the Court’s consideration of the certified question” referred by the Ninth Circuit. They also advised us that they filed a stipulated motion to dismiss with prejudice the appeal pend

ing in the Ninth Circuit.
Given the parties’ settlement, we decline to answer the certified question. Any answer that we might give to that question would be advisory. Because only the certified question is before this court, no further action is necessary to resolve the certification.
The Oregon Supreme Court declines to answer the certified question.
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 21
                                        
                      LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY
                                        
<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 

                                                                   Date of
                                                   Place of      Incorporation
Name                                            Incorporation   or Acquisition
----------------------------------------------  -------------  -----------------
<S>                                             <C>             <C>  
Automated Language Processing Systems, Ltd.     Canada          November 17, 1986

a.l.p. Services, Inc.                           Utah, USA       November 25, 1987
 
A.L.P. SERVICES SARL                            France          November 30, 1987
 
INTERDOC SARL                                   France          November 30, 1987
 
Automated Language Processing Services, Ltd.    England         December 2, 1987
 
ALPNET GmbH                                     Germany         January 11, 1988
 
ALPNET Canada Inc.                              Canada          January 15, 1988
 
Dr. W.D. Haehl GmbH                             Germany         January 29, 1988
 
Interlingua Group Ltd.                          England         March 31, 1988
 
ALPNET U.K. Ltd.                                England         March 31, 1988
 
Interlingua S.L.                                Spain           March 31, 1988
 
ALPNET Singapore Pte. Ltd.                      Singapore       March 31, 1988
 
ALPNET Ireland Ltd.                             Ireland         August 18, 1995
 
AOLI Network Technology Ltd.                    China           December 12, 1995
 
ALPNET Netherlands BV                           The Netherlands February 12, 1996
 
ALPNET Belgium NV                               Belgium         September 16, 1996
 
Computype Limited                               England         January 31, 1997
 
ALPNET do Brasil Ltda.                          Brazil          August 28, 1998
 
NET TEXT CC AB                                  Sweden          September 1, 1998
_________________ 
</TABLE>

Notes:  (1)  All subsidiaries are wholly-owned.
        (2)  The Company's Korean, Japanese and Thai operations are branches of
             ALPNET, Inc.

                                      20
DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-00939-WHA

sf-3825095 

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 

[Counsel Signatures Appear at the End]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 

WAYMO LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

OTTOMOTTO LLC; OTTO TRUCKING 

LLC, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 3:17-cv-00939-WHA

DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION OF 

PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL VOIR 

DIRE QUESTIONS 

Judge: The Honorable William Alsup 

Trial Date: October 10, 2017 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 1721 Filed 09/21/17 Page 1 of 3
DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-00939-WHA 1

sf-3825095 

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 

SUPPLEMENTAL PROPOSED VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS 

BY UBER AND OTTOMOTTO 

1. Have you heard the expression “Pleading the Fifth” or “Taking the Fifth?” If you 

have, do you have any opinion, favorable or unfavorable, of individuals who plead or take the 

Fifth? 

2. Have any of you cancelled an Uber account? 

Dated: September 21, 2017 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 

By: /s/ Arturo J. González 

ARTURO J. GONZÁLEZ 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 

and OTTOMOTTO LLC 

Dated: September 21, 2017 GOODWIN PROCTER LLP

By: /s/ Neel Chatterjee 

NEEL CHATTERJEE 

Attorneys for Defendant 

OTTO TRUCKING, LLC 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 1721 Filed 09/21/17 Page 2 of 3
DEFENDANTS’ SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL VOIR DIRE QUESTIONS

CASE NO. 3:17-CV-00939-WHA 2

sf-3825095 

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 

ATTESTATION OF E-FILED SIGNATURE 

I, Arturo J. González, am the ECF User whose ID and password are being used to file 

Defendants’ Submission of Proposed Supplemental Voir Dire Questions. In compliance with 

General Order 45, X.B., I hereby attest that Neel Chatterjee has concurred in this filing. 

Dated: September 21, 2017 /s/ Arturo J. González

 Arturo J. González 

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 1721 Filed 09/21/17 Page 3 of 3
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27977-27978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12973]



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


FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Michael J. Corliss; Change in Bank Control Notice

Acquisition of Shares of Banks or Bank Holding Companies

    The notificant listed below has applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 [[Page 27978]] CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank 
holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on notices 
are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notice is available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. Once the notice has been accepted for 
processing, it will also be available for inspection at the offices of 
the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in 
writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for the notice or to the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than 
June 9, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Kenneth R. Binning, 
Director, Bank Holding Company) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105:
    1. Michael J. Corliss (through the Corliss Valley Bancorporation 
Trust), Sumner, Washington; to retain 11.75 percent, and acquire an 
additional 2.35 percent, for a total of 14.10 percent of the voting 
shares of Valley Bancorporation, Sumner, Washington.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 22, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-12973 Filed 5-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
James A. BRYANT, petitioner, v. Robert M. STEVENSON, III, Warden.

No. 13-6937.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 98 (Monday, May 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27096-27097]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12420]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-291-000]


Algonquin Gas Transmission Co.; Notice of Proposed Changes in 
FERC Gas Tariff

May 16, 1995.
    Take notice that on May 12, 1995, Algonquin Gas Transmission 
Company (Algonquin) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
Fourth Revised Volume No. 1, the following revised tariff sheets, 
effective June 11, 1995:

Original Sheet No. 93A
Third Revised Sheet No. 700
First Revised Sheet No. 701
First Revised Sheet No. 702
Third Revised Sheet No. 703

    Algonquin states that the purpose of this filing is to reflect a 
revision in the take-or-pay allocation methodology of National Fuel Gas 
Supply Corporation (National Fuel), and to flow through $989,803.46 of 
take-or-pay charges billed to Algonquin by National Fuel.
    Algonquin further states that copies of this filing were mailed to 
all affected customers of Algonquin and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with 18 CFR Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. All such motions or 
protests should be filed on or before May 23, 1995. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are [[Page 27097]] available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-12420 Filed 5-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1664 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1664

     To ensure that amounts in the Victims of Crime Fund are fully 
                               obligated.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 14, 2005

Mr. Simmons (for himself, Mrs. Maloney, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Abercrombie, 
  Mr. Paul, Mr. Holden, Mrs. Johnson of Connecticut, Mr. Shimkus, Mr. 
McGovern, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. McHugh, Ms. Hart, Mr. Michaud, Mr. McNulty, 
 Mr. Platts, Ms. Schakowsky, and Mr. Tierney) introduced the following 
       bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To ensure that amounts in the Victims of Crime Fund are fully 
                               obligated.

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

SECTION 1. FULL OBLIGATION OF AMOUNTS IN THE VICTIMS OF CRIME FUND.

    Section 1402 of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601) 
is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(h)(1) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Act 
(including the emergency reserve referred to in subsection (d)(5)), the 
Director shall ensure that all sums in the Fund in a fiscal year are in 
fact obligated in the subsequent fiscal year.
    ``(2) A provision of law may not be construed as modifying or 
superseding the provisions of paragraph (1) unless that provision of 
law--
            ``(A) specifically refers to this section; and
            ``(B) specifically states that such provision of law 
        modifies or supersedes the provisions of this section.''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       1,360,711
<SECURITIES>                                   353,907
<RECEIVABLES>                                  864,872
<ALLOWANCES>                                   102,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,643,400
<PP&E>                                          34,896
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,678,296
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          680,078
<BONDS>                                        667,076
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        75,652
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,995,659
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,678,296
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               111,089
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                38,974
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,028
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 57,087
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    57,087
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 27965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12945]



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

COMMITTEE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE AGREEMENTS


Announcement of Import Restraint Limits for Certain Cotton, Wool, 
Man-Made Fiber, Silk Blend and Other Vegetable Fiber Textiles and 
Textile Products Produced or Manufactured in Hong Kong; Correction

May 22, 1995.
    In the letter to the Commissioner of Customs in the table under the 
heading ``Category,'' make the following changes:
    1.On page 17323, April 5, 1995, remove Categories 843 and 844 from 
Group II. The Group II designation will now read: 237, 239, 330-359, 
431-459, 630-659, as a group;
    2.On page 17324, April 5, 1995, add Categories 843 and 844 to Group 
III. The Group III designation will now read: 831-844 and 847-859, as a 
group.
Rita D. Hayes,
Chairman, Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements.
[FR Doc. 95-12945 Filed 5-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DR-F
Darrell Matthew COLEMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3447

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 31, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 4 TO LUNA DECLARATION

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cv-00106-JD   document 98-11   filed 01/31/17   page 1 of 6

EXHIBIT 4 TO LUNA DECLARATION

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cv-00106-JD   document 98-11   filed 01/31/17   page 2 of 6

EXHIBIT 4 TO LUNA DECLARATION

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cv-00106-JD   document 98-11   filed 01/31/17   page 3 of 6

EXHIBIT 4 TO LUNA DECLARATION

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cv-00106-JD   document 98-11   filed 01/31/17   page 4 of 6

EXHIBIT 4 TO LUNA DECLARATION

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cv-00106-JD   document 98-11   filed 01/31/17   page 5 of 6

EXHIBIT 4 TO LUNA DECLARATION

USDC IN/ND case 2:14-cv-00106-JD   document 98-11   filed 01/31/17   page 6 of 6
<PAGE>

                                                                  EXHIBIT 10 (m)

                        COMPUTER TASK GROUP, INCORPORATED

                  EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION PLANS AND ARRANGEMENTS

The following is a list of all plans, management contracts and compensatory
arrangements in which the executive officers of the Company participate and
where they can be found:

      Stock Purchase Agreement with Randolph A. Marks - Registration Statement
      No. 2-71086 on Form S-7 filed on February 27, 1981.

      Disability Insurance and Health Arrangements - Amendment No. 1 to
      Registration Statement No. 2-71086 on Form S-7 filed on March 24, 1981.

      First Employee Stock Purchase Plan (Eighth Amendment and Restatement) -
      Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, Exhibit
      10(p).

      Executive Supplemental Benefit Plan 1997 Restatement, - Annual Report on
      Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, Exhibit 10(l).

      1991 Restricted Stock Plan - Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
      December 31, 2001, Exhibit 10(j).

      Computer Task Group, Incorporated Non-Qualified Key Employee Deferred
      Compensation Plan - Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
      31, 2000, Exhibit 10(i).

      Computer Task Group, Incorporated 2000 Equity Award Plan - Definitive
      proxy statement dated April 2004 as Exhibit A.

      Change in Control Agreement, dated July 16, 2001, between the Registrant
      and James R. Boldt - Annual Report on From 10-K for the year ended
      December 31, 2001, Exhibit 10(o).

      Employment Agreement, dated July 16, 2001, between the Registrant and
      James R. Boldt - Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
      31, 2001, Exhibit 10(p).


                                                                              21
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

HAMMOND DIVISION

MALIBU MEDIA LLC

PLAINTIFF,

VS.

JOHN DOE

SUBSCRIBER ASSIGNED IP ADDRESS

71.194.56.83

DEFENDANT.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CAUSE NO. 2:13-CV-99-RLM-JEM

O R D E R

A telephonic scheduling conference is hereby set for Friday, May 16,

2014 at 1:00 p.m. (E.D.T.), with the court to initiate the call. To further the

goals of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 1 and 16(b) and assist the court in

preparing for the conference, the parties are directed to prepare and submit

a brief joint status report on or before May 9, 2014 informing the court of

the following:

(a) the date by which dispositive motions shall be filed;

(b) the anticipated length of trial, whether issues (for example,

liability and damages) should be bifurcated for trial, and

whether special verdict forms will be needed at trial (and if so,

the issues the verdict forms will have to address);

(c) the status of settlement negotiations; and 

case 2:13-cv-00099-RLM-JEM document 32 filed 10/11/13 page 1 of 2
(d) whether they anticipate requesting any further orders of the

court.

The attorneys of record and all unrepresented parties that have appeared

in the case are jointly responsible for attempting in good faith to agree on the

contents of the status report and for submitting the report to the court as

required by this order.

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: October 11, 2013

 /s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr. 

Judge

United States District Court

-2-

case 2:13-cv-00099-RLM-JEM document 32 filed 10/11/13 page 2 of 2
Joseph Lee McFADDEN, petitioner, v. John C. JEPERTINGER.

No. 13-6409.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 2, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 102 (Friday, May 26, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 27988]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12993]



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


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Pea Ridge National Military Park Advisory Team; Meeting

    Notice is hereby given in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act that a meeting of the Pea Ridge National Military Park 
Advisory Team will be held at 7 p.m., on Thursday, June 15, 1995, in 
the park visitor center auditorium, 15930 Highway 62, Garfield, 
Arkansas.
    The Pea Ridge National Military Park Advisory Team was established 
under authority of section 3 of Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-2(c)) 
to provide a forum for dialogue between community representatives and 
the Pea Ridge National Military Park on management issues affecting the 
park and the community.
    The matter to be discussed at this meeting includes:
--Boundary Study
    The meeting will be open to the public. However, facilities and 
space for accommodating members of the public are limited, and persons 
will be accommodated on a first-come-first served basis. Any member of 
the public may file a written statement concerning the matters to be 
discussed with the Superintendent, Pea Ridge National Military Park.
    Persons wishing further information concerning this meeting, or who 
wish to submit written statements may contact Steve Adams, 
Superintendent, Pea Ridge National Military Park, P.O. Box 700, Pea 
Ridge, AR 72751-0700, Telephone 501/451-8122.
    Minutes of the meeting will be available for public inspection four 
weeks after the meeting at the office of Pea Ridge National Military 
Park.

    Dated: May 15, 1995.
Jerry Rogers,
Regional Director Southwest Region.
[FR Doc. 95-12993 Filed 5-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-M
AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION, et al., petitioners, v. EME HOMER CITY GENERATION, L.P., et al.

No. 12-1183.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted limited to the questions presented by the petition in No. 12-1182. The case is consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument.