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

-1- 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION, 

 - and - 

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

 Reorganized Debtors. 

☐ Affects PG&E Corporation 

☐ Affects Pacific Gas and 

 Electric Company 

☒ Affects both Debtors 

* All papers shall be filed in 

the Lead Case, No. 19-30088 (DM).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Bankruptcy Case 

No. 19-30088-DM 

Chapter 11 

Jointly Administered 

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR TELEPHONE CONFERENCE 

RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE 

The email request of October 2, 2022, from Will Abrams to 

the courtroom deputy and his reply of October 3, 2022, is DENIED 

for the reasons stated in email oppositions submitted by counsel 

________________________________________

DENNIS MONTALI

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge

Signed and Filed: October 4, 2022

Entered on Docket 

October 04, 2022

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13044 Filed: 10/04/22 Entered: 10/04/22 13:09:22 Page 1

of 3
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

-2- 

for the Fire Victim Trust and the Debtors, and for the reasons 

stated below.1

What Mr. Abrams refers to as the Motion For Trust Discovery 

(Dkt. 12440) has already been decided by the court’s August 2, 

2022 Order Authorizing Discovery Regarding Administration of FVT 

(Dkt. 12682) and is final. What he refers to as the Motion For 

JAMS Discovery (Dkt. 12766), has been responded to by the FVT 

(Dkt. 13035), by another party (Dkt. 13036) and by Justice John 

K. Trotter (Ret.) (Dkt. 13039). And what he refers to as Motion 

For Debtor Discovery (Dkt. 12995) remains subject to a response 

by the Debtors on October 12, 2022, pursuant to this court’s 

order of September 26, 2022 (Dkt. 13005). 

Thus, as to the first order, no such discovery is 

appropriate and as to the second and third order, no discovery 

is authorized unless and until the court authorizes it. 

**END OF ORDER** 

 

1 The clerk is directed to post on the case docket the four emails 

mentioned in the text. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13044 Filed: 10/04/22 Entered: 10/04/22 13:09:22 Page 2

of 3
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

-3- 

COURT SERVICE LIST 

William B. Abrams 

1519 Branch Owl Place 

Santa Rosa, CA 95409 

William B. Abrams 

2041 Stagecoach Rd. 

Santa Rosa, CA 95404 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 13044 Filed: 10/04/22 Entered: 10/04/22 13:09:22 Page 3

of 3
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 Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on April 15, 2010, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Phase Matrix, Springfield, VA, has withdrawn as a party to this venture. In addition, Pacific Mindworks, Inc. has changed its address to San Diego, CA.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On May 29, 2001, Interchangeable Virtual Instruments Foundation, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on July 30, 2001 (66 FR 39336).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on December 1, 2009. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on December 21, 2009 (74 FR 67902).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 2010-12030 Filed 5-19-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

January 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

129135 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

CORNELIUS G. BACHUS, Personal Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, Representative of the Estate of DEBORAH Justices JANE BACHUS, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 129135 

 COA: 252686 

Alcona CC: 02-011062-NO 

SHIRLEY FOLEY,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 14, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

CAVANAGH, J., would grant leave to appeal. 

s0120 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 27, 2006 

Clerk
#### James H. Birdsall, Respondent, v. Henry E. Emmons and Another, Appellants.

Order affirmed, with costs.—

Dykman, J.:

This is an appeal from an order made at the Special Term, denying a. motion to vacate an attachment against the property of the defendants, who were nonresidents, on the ground that the affidavit upon which the attachment was issued failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The attachment was issued on the 5th day of February, 1895, and on February 18,1895, the property attached was sold by order of the court as perishable property. The defendants have not appeared or answered, and judgment in favor of the plaintiff lias been duly entered in Orange county. An order to show cause why the attachment should not be vacated was made returnable on the 16th day of April, 1895, and the motion to vacate the attachment was made on that day and denied, with costs. The motion to vacate the attachment was. based on the contents of the affidavit of the laintifc upon which the attachment was-ased, and no counter affidavits were used. In our view, the affidavit upon which the attachment was granted is sufficient, and sets forth a compl etc cause of action upon an expressed and implied contract and a breach thereof on the part of the defendants. The order should be affirmed, with costs.

Pratt, J., concurred; Brown, P. J., not sitting.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T F R E D S WANI GA N, P e titio n e r- A p p e llan t, v. AN THON Y P. KA NE, R es po nd ent- A pp el l ee . N o. 07- 56140 D. C . No . C V- 0 6 - 0 3 6 8 1 - DO C ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia D a vi d O . C a rt e r , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d M ar c h 8, 2011 ** B efo re: F A R R IS , L E A V Y , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C al i forni a s t at e pri soner F re d S w ani gan app ea l s pro se fr om the di stri ct co u rt ’ s j u d g m en td en yi n g h i s 2 8 U . S . C . § 2 2 5 4 h ab eas p et i t i o n . W e d i sm i ss. 

# FI LED MA R 10 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 56140 2 S w ani gan con t ends thatthe B oard’ s 200 5 d ec i si on t o d eny hi m parol e w as n o t s up p o rte db y“s o m e e v id e n c e ” a n dth e r e f o r e v io la te dh is du e p r o c e s s r ig h ts . A f t e rbr i e f i ng w a s c om pl e t e d i n thi s c a s e , thi s c ourthe l d tha tac e rt i f i c a t e of ap p e a lab ility( “C O A ” ) is r e q u ir e dto c h a lle n g e th e d e n ia l o f p ar o le . See H

a yw a rd v . M a rs h a ll , 6 0 3 F. 3 d5 4 6 , 5 5 4 - 5 5 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 1 0 ) ( e n b an c ) . N o w th e Sup r e me C o u rt h a s h e ldth a t th e o n lyf e d e r a l r ig h t a t is s u e in th e p ar o le c o n te x t is pr oc e dur a l , a nd the onl ypr ope ri nqui ryi s w ha tpr oc e s s the i nm a t e r e c e i ve d, not w h e th e rth e s ta te c o u rt d e c id e dth e c a s e c o rr e c tly . See Sw artho utv. C oo ke , 131 S . C t. 8 5 9 , 8 6 2 - 6 3 ( 2 0 1 1 ) . B e c au s e S w an ig an r a is e s n o p r o c e du r a l c h a lle n g e s , a C O A c a n n o t is s u e , a n dw e d is m is s th e ap p e a l f o rla c ko f

ju r is d ic tio n . See 28 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 3 ( c ) ( 2 ) . D I SM I SSED .
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2191 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 16:12:15 Page 1 of

2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2191 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 16:12:15 Page 2 of

2
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION and PACIFIC GAS 

AND ELECTRIC COMPANY,

 Debtors 

Chapter 11 

No. 19-30088 (DM) 

(Jointly Administered) 

TRANSFER OF CLAIM OTHER THAN FOR SECURITY 

A CLAIM HAS BEEN FILED IN THIS CASE or deemed filed under 11 U.S.C. § 1111(a). 

Transferee hereby gives evidence and notice pursuant to Rule 3001(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of 

Bankruptcy Procedure of the transfer, other than for security, of the claim referenced in this 

evidence and notice. 

Sierra Trench Protection Cherokee Debt Acquisition, LLC 

Name of Transferor Name of Transferee

Schedule No: 3.3354 & 1033395

Debtor: Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

(19-30089) 

Claim Amount: $16,750.00 

Name and Address where notices and payments 

to transferee should be sent: 

Cherokee Debt Acquisition, LLC 

1325 Avenue of the Americas, 28th Floor 

New York, NY 10019 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the information provided in this notice is true and correct 

to the best of my knowledge and belief. 

By: _____________________ Date: July 16, 2019 

Transferee/Transferee’s Agent

Penalty for making a false statement: Fine of up to $500,000 or imprisonment for up to 5 years, 

or both. 18 U.S.C. §§ 152 & 3571. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3006 Filed: 07/16/19 Entered: 07/16/19 12:59:36 Page 1 of

2
16

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3006 Filed: 07/16/19 Entered: 07/16/19 12:59:36 Page 2 of

2
#### In the Matter of Theodore Heickel.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 508 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 508

     To extend the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program for five years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2013

   Mr. Grimm (for himself, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, Mr. 
 Sessions, Mr. Carson of Indiana, Mr. King of New York, Mr. Meeks, Mr. 
Ross, Mr. Bishop of New York, Mr. Duffy, and Mrs. McCarthy of New York) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                           Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To extend the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program for five years.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 
Reauthorization Act of 2013'' or the ``TRIA Reauthorization Act of 
2013''.

SEC. 2. FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TERRORISM RISK INSURANCE PROGRAM.

    (a) Program Years.--Section 102(11)(G) of the Terrorism Risk 
Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note) is amended by striking 
``2014'' and inserting ``2019''.
    (b) Timing of Mandatory Recoupment.--Section 103(e)(7)(E)(i)(III) 
of such Act is amended by striking ``2017'' and inserting ``2024''.
    (c) Termination Date.--Section 108(a) of such Act is amended by 
striking ``2014'' and inserting ``2019''.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 10, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-10046

Summary Calendar

 

JAMES W. GREEN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CITIGROUP INC.; COMMERCIAL CREDIT COMPANY; PRIMERICA; TRAVELERS;

COMMERCIAL CREDIT COMPANY DISABILITY INCOME PROGRAM; COMMERCIAL

CREDIT COMPANY SHORT TERM DISABILITY PLAN; COMMERCIAL CREDIT

COMPANY LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN; COMMERCIAL CREDIT COMPANY LIFE

INSURANCE PLAN; COMMERCIAL CREDIT COMPANY MEDICAL BENEFITS PLAN;

COMMERCIAL CREDIT COMPANY DENTAL BENEFITS PLAN; COMMERCIAL CREDIT

COMPANY PENSION (RETIREMENT) PLAN,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:03-CV-1635

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

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

James W. Green appeals the district court’s judgment

granting the defendants’ motion for sanctions and dismissing

Green’s claims for want of prosecution. On appeal, Green argues

the merits of his underlying claims but fails to provide any

legal arguments or authority challenging the district court’s
No. 04-10046

-2-

determinations to grant defendants’ motion for sanctions and to

dismiss his claims for failure to prosecute. Although pro se

briefs are afforded liberal construction, Haines v. Kerner, 404

U.S. 519, 520 (1972), even pro se litigants must brief arguments

in order to preserve them. Yohey v. Collins, 985 F.2d 222,

224-25 (5th Cir. 1993). Because Green fails to address the

district court’s basis for dismissing his claims, he has

abandoned these issues. See Yohey, 985 F.2d at 224-25.

The district court judgment is AFFIRMED. Green’s motions

for leave to file a supplemental brief, to enjoin ongoing

fiduciary violations, to take notice of post-judgment data from

another federal agency, relating to appellant’s motion to enjoin

fiduciary violations, and to borrow certain records from archives

are DENIED. All of Green’s motions are DENIED. Appellees’

amended motion for sanctions and an injunction is DENIED. 

However, Green is WARNED that any future frivolous appeals filed

by him or on his behalf will invite the imposition of sanctions. 

He should therefore review any pending appeals to ensure that

they do not raise arguments that are frivolous.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CADMUS COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION'S DECEMBER 31, 1997 CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME INCLUDED IN THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,210
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   65,999
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,171
<INVENTORY>                                     22,758
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                98,499
<PP&E>                                         227,826
<DEPRECIATION>                                 104,284
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 267,766
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           61,676
<BONDS>                                         84,038
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,923
<OTHER-SE>                                     100,235
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   276,766
<SALES>                                        188,410
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               188,410
<CGS>                                          146,195
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  175,920
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   640
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   814
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,794
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,056
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,101
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,955
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,955
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .61
        

</TABLE>
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-10-00715-CV

Frank J. GARCIA,

Appellant

v.

Lorraine D. GARCIA,

Appellee

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009-CI-16642

Honorable Janet P. Littlejohn, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 8, 2010

DISMISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion contains a certificate of 

service to appellee, who has not opposed the motion. Therefore, we grant the motion and dismiss 

the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). Costs of appeal are taxed against appellant. See id.

42.1(d).

PER CURIAM
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

      ( print page 29354)    
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel, Academic Community Partnership Conference Series.                    

*Date:*                         June 14, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road, NW., Washington, DC 20015.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Michele C. Hindi-Alexander, PhD, Division of Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 1600 Executive Boulevard, Rm. 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892. (301) 435-8382.                         *hindialm@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: May 19, 2010.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-12575 Filed 5-24-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P