alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
David M. Audet, OSB No. 79014

249 NE Lincoln

Hillsboro, Oregon 97124

(503) 648-3020

Attorney for Imelda Sanchez-Olivera

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, ) No. 3:14-cr-00267-BR

)

v. )

)

FABIAN SANDOVAL-RAMOS, ) MOTION IN LIMINE

) (Marital Privilege)

Defendant. )

Imelda Sanchez-Olivera is the wife of defendant Fabian Sandoval-Ramos.

She has been subpoenaed by the government to testify against her husband. Ms.

Sanchez-Olivera, through her attorney, David Audet, moves this Court for an Order

allowing her to not testify against her husband and to prevent the disclosure of private

communications between them.

I have called AUSA Leah Bolstad in an effort to determine what testimony

from Ms. Sanchez-Olivera the government intends to offer. Ms. Bolstad has not

returned my call. Based on my own investigation I believe the government intends to

offer testimony that the defendant asked his wife to keep his phone and that he asked

her to throw away unopened lactose bags.

Page 1 - MOTION IN LIMINE (Marital Privilege)

Case 3:14-cr-00267-HZ Document 190 Filed 10/29/15 Page 1 of 2
Federal Rule of Evidence 501 provides that “the privilege of a witness [or]

person...shall be governed by the principles of the common law as they may be

interpreted by the courts of the United States in the light of reason and experience.”

The Supreme Court has recognized two privileges that arise from the marital

relationship. The first permits a witness to refuse to testify against his or her spouse.

See Trammel v. United States, 445 U.S. 40, 53, 100 S.Ct. 906, 63 L.Ed.2d 186 (1980).

The witness spouse alone holds the privilege. Ms. Sanchez-Olivera wants to assert her

privilege to not testify against her husband.

The second privilege is the “marital communications” privilege. This

privilege provides that communications between spouses, privately made, are generally

assumed to have been intended as confidential and are therefore, privileged. Wolfe v.

United States, 291 U.S. 7 (1934), United States v. Montgomery, 384 F3d 1050 (9th

 Cir.

2004). The privilege extends to words and acts intended to the communications,

requires a valid marriage, and applies only to confidential communications. The

government bears the burden of showing the communication was not intended to be

confidential. Blau v. United States, 340 US 332, 333 (1951).

IT IS SO MOVED this 29th day of October, 2015.

/s/ David M. Audet

David M. Audet, OSB No 79014

Attorney for Defendant

Page 2 - MOTION IN LIMINE (Marital Privilege)

Case 3:14-cr-00267-HZ Document 190 Filed 10/29/15 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2



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 Thanksgiving Coffee Company, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended November 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, the undersigned President of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (i) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | ---- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ Joan KatzeffPresidentNovember 12, 2005
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. AD21-11-000]

                    As announced in the Notice of Technical Conference issued in this proceeding on March 5, 2021, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) will convene its annual Commissioner-led Reliability Technical Conference on Thursday, September 30, 2021 from approximately 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time. The purpose of this conference is to discuss policy issues related to the reliability of the                           ( print page 44354)                        Bulk-Power System. The conference will be held virtually via WebEx.                

                    The final agenda for this event is attached. The conference will be open for the public to attend virtually, and there is no fee for attendance. A second supplemental notice will be issued prior to the conference with the confirmed speakers. Information on the technical conference will also be posted on the Calendar of Events on the Commission's website,                     *http://www.ferc.gov,*                     prior to the event. The conference will be transcribed. Transcripts of the conference will be available for a fee from Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc. (202-347-3700).                

                    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please send an email to                     *accessibility@ferc.gov,*                     call toll-free (866) 208-3372 (voice) or (202) 208-8659 (TTY), or send a fax to (202) 208-2106 with the required accommodations.                

                    For more information about this technical conference, please contact Lodie White at                     *Lodie.White@ferc.gov*                     or (202) 502-8453. For information related to logistics, please contact Sarah McKinley at                     *Sarah.Mckinley@ferc.gov*                     or (202) 502-8368.                

Dated: August 6, 2021.

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2021-17241 Filed 8-11-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Order filed March 10, 2022 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-22-00035-CV

____________

WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, III, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 113th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2018-66223

O R D E R

A notice of appeal in this case was filed in the trial court January 18, 2022. 

Appellant has not paid the filing fee of $205.00, and he was notified that he had not 

paid the filing fee on February 1, 2022. In a similar vein, the clerk responsible for 

preparing the record notified this court that appellant had not made payment for the 

clerk’s record. No evidence that appellant has established indigence or is otherwise 

excused by statute or the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure from paying fees or 

costs has been filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 5; Tex. R. Civ. P. 145. On February 8, 
2

2022, this court notified appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal unless 

they filed a response with proof of payment for the clerk’s record. No response was 

filed. Therefore, the court issues the following order. 

Appellant is ordered to, on or before March 31, 2022, either demonstrate his 

indigence or both pay the filing fee in the amount of $205.00 to the clerk of this court 

and demonstrate that he has made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. See

Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). Failure to fulfill either set of requirements will result in 

dismissal of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 37.3(b). 

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Jewell, Zimmerer, and Hassan.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Plant Science Research: St. Paul, MN
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area St. Paul, Minnesota Plant Science Research People & Locations







Sheri  Huerd
                        Plant Science Research

                        




                        
                        Biological Laboratory Technical
                        Phone: (612) 626-2180
                        
                        
                        Fax: (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1585

To provide for the appointment of additional Federal district judges in the

State of Florida, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 29, 1998

Mr. MACK (for himself and Mr. GRAHAM) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To provide for the appointment of additional Federal district

judges in the State of Florida, 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,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Florida Federal Judge5 ship Act of 1998’’.

6 SEC. 2. DISTRICT JUDGES FOR THE FLORIDA DISTRICT

7 COURTS.

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—The President shall appoint, by

9 and with the advice and consent of the Senate—
2

•S 1585 IS

1 (1) 3 additional district judges for the middle

2 district of Florida; and

3 (2) 2 additional district judges for the southern

4 district of Florida.

5 (b) TEMPORARY JUDGESHIP.—

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—The President shall appoint,

7 by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,

8 1 additional district judge for the middle district of

9 Florida.

10 (2) FIRST VACANCY NOT FILLED.—The first va11 cancy in the office of district judge in the middle

12 district of Florida, occurring 7 years or more after

13 the confirmation date of the judge named to fill a

14 temporary judgeship created by this subsection, shall

15 not be filled.

16 (c) TABLES.—In order that the table contained in

17 section 133 of title 28, United States Code, will reflect

18 the changes in the total number of permanent district

19 judgeships authorized as a result of subsection (a) of this

20 section, the item relating to Florida in such table is

21 amended to read as follows:

‘‘Florida:

Northern ........................................................................................... 4

Middle ............................................................................................... 14

Southern ............................................................................................ 18.’’.
3

•S 1585 IS

1 SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

2 There are authorized to be appropriated such sums

3 as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this

4 Act, including such sums as may be necessary to provide

5 appropriate space and facilities for the judicial positions

6 created by this Act.

7 SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

8 This Act shall take effect on the date of enactment

9 of this Act.

Æ
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Fort Collins, Colorado
 close




            Search small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home People & Locations







Joseph  Duchene
                        Location Support Staff

                        




                        
                        Information Technology Specialist (Data Management)
                        Phone: (970) 492-7716
                        
                        
                        Fax: (970) 492-7719(Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### STIEFEL v. NEW YORK NOVELTY CO. et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 22, 1896.)

I. Appeal—Review—Necessity for Exception.

Where the record shows that no exception was filed to the decision below, as required by Code, § 1022, the appellate division cannot review the law or the facts.

8. Same—Leave to File Exception Nunc pro Tunc.

An appellant who has failed to take an exception to the decision below, as required by Code, § 1022, may be allowed to apply to the court below for leave to file it nunc pro tunc.

Appeal from special term, New York county.

Action by Mortimer Stiefel, as receiver of the New York Novelty Company, against the New York Novelty Company and others. From a judgment dismissing the complaint after the trial, plaintiff appeals.

Decision on appeal suspended.

Argued before VAN BRUNT, P. J., and WILLIAMS, PATTERSON, O’BRIEN, and INGRAHAM, JJ.

E. J. Lauer, for appellant.

Benjamin Tuska and Edwin T. Taliaferro, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

It appearing upon an examination of the record that no exception has been filed to the decision, as provided for by section 1022 of the Code, this appellate division has no power to review any question of law or fact which might otherwise have been presented upon this record. This rule seems to be laid down by the court of appeals in the case of Otten v. Railway Co., 150 N. Y. 395, 44 N. E. 1033, in which the court holds that it is by virtue of this exception alone that the appellate division has power to review either the facts or the law in a case where the court or referee has filed a decision concisely stating the grounds upon which the issues have been decided. Under these circumstances we think that the appel*512lant should be allowed an opportunity to apply to the special term for leave to file such exception nunc pro tunc. The decision of this appeal should be suspended a sufficient length of time to enable the appellant to make such application.
No. 70223 

# FILED JUN 1 6 2016 V1
. C 1 k .a . L
. ILDEMA
.

N ,Ft 

### *ma NV CHIEF DEP CL BY

J. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA EDRICK DILLARD, Petitioner, 

### VS. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK, Respondent. 

### ORDER DENYING PETITION

This is a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing the district court to resolve a petition for genetic marker testing. We have reviewed the documents submitted in this matter, and without deciding upon the merits of any claims raised therein, we decline to exercise original jurisdiction in this matter. 

### See NRS 34.160. We are confident that the district court will resolve all pending matters as expeditiously as its calendar permits. Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

cc: Hon. William D. Kephart, District Judge Christopher Oram, Esq. Edrick Dillard Attorney General/Carson City Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 

# Icp- IS`H(6 (0) 1947A ep
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             514
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   514
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   26821
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           403
<OTHER-SE>                                       13967
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     26821
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  6535
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (6535)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (6535)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (6535)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.02)
        

</TABLE>
II

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1583

To suspend temporarily the duty on β-Bromo-β-nitrostyrene.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 29, 1998

Mr. BREAUX introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on β-Bromo-β-nitrostyrene.

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

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON β-BROMO-β4 NITROSTYRENE.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

8 new item:

‘‘ 9902.32.92 β-Bromo-βnitrostyrene (CAS

No. 7166–19–0)

(provided for in

subheading

2904.90.47) .......... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2000 ’’.
2

S 1583 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 this section applies with respect to goods entered, or with3 drawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the

4 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements of Chorus Communications Group, Ltd. for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 1997 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                            2149
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     5600
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                       1582
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 13226
<PP&E>                                           64160
<DEPRECIATION>                                   28736
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   57354
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             6188
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         13868
<OTHER-SE>                                       14510
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     57354
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  9590
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     6767
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 328
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   2609
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1070
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1539
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1539
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .57
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .57
        

</TABLE>