alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

HON. PATRICK J. DUGGAN

CIVIL NO. 09-11290

TRUSTEES OF THE BRICKLAYERS PENSION TRUST FUNDMETROPOLITAN AREA, ET.AL,

Plaintiff(s),

-vEVERLAST MASONRY, INC./DRKK DEVELOPMENT, LLC,

Defendant(s).

 /

ORDER TO PROVIDE STATUS

The above case was filed on April 7, 2009. All proceedings against the defendants

have been stayed because the Court was informed on April 8, 2010, that the defendants

had filed bankruptcy.

Past experience has shown that in many of these cases, plaintiffs’ counsel agrees

that the case may be dismissed, without prejudice, because a claim has been filed in the

bankruptcy estate, the matter has been resolved, or no useful purpose would be served by

continuing the case. Please advise if you object to the case being dismissed without

prejudice. If so, please advise as to the status of the case and when you expect this matter

will be resolved so that this case can be closed or the stay lifted.

Counsel for plaintiffs shall provide the status of the above-entitled case within 21

days, or otherwise show cause why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice.

for lack of progress pursuant to Local Rule 41.

Dated: January 11, 2011

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on January 11, 2011, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Marilyn Orem 

Case Manager

2:09-cv-11290-PJD-MKM Doc # 38 Filed 01/11/11 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 230
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 Commerce

###### International Trade Administration

This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. in Room 2104, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.

*Docket Number:*                     08-027. Applicant: The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210. Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model Helios 600. Manufacturer: FEI Company/Phillips Electron Optics, The Netherlands. Intended Use: See notice at 73 FR 37408, July 1, 2008.                

*Docket Number:*                     08-029. Applicant: Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37232-8725. Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model Tecnai G2 F20 TWIN. Manufacturer: FEI Company, The Netherlands. Intended Use: See notice at 72 FR 37408, July 1, 2008.                

*Docket Number:*                     08-030. Applicant: University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model Tecnai G2 F20 S-TWIN. Manufacturer: FEI Company, The Netherlands. Intended Use: See notice at 72 FR 34708, July 1, 2008.                

*Comments:*                     None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such purposes as these instruments are intended to be used, was being manufactured in the United States at the time the instruments were ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is an electron microscope and is intended for research or scientific educational uses requiring an electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in the United States at the time of order of each instrument.                

Dated: July 25, 2008.

Faye Robinson,

Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff, Import Administration.

[FR Doc. E8-17723 Filed 8-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
If this opinion indicates that it is “FOR PUBLICATION,” it is subject to

revision until final publication in the Michigan Appeals Reports.

- 1

- 

### S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N

C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant, UNPUBLISHED

August 15, 2024

v No. 368411

Newaygo Circuit Court

AIDEN MICHAEL WYSOCKI, LC No. 2023

- 013163

- FC

Defendant

- Appellee.

Before: S WARTZLE

, P .J., and K. F. K ELLY and Y OUNG , JJ.

K. F. K ELLY ( concurring )

.

I concur with the majority’s decision that this matter should be remanded.

/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JOHN CORRION,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 09-cv-11531

v. 

 HONORABLE STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

NICK LUDWICK,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION UNDER 

RULE 60(b)(1)TO CORRECT HIS MISTAKES (docket no. 8)

Plaintiff John A. Corrion has moved for relief from the Court’s Order and Judgment

summarily dismissing his civil rights complaint. The Court determined that the complaint

was frivolous and failed to state a claim because Corrion did not show that defendant Nick

Ludwick was personally involved in the incidents about which Corrion complained. 

In his pending motion, brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1),

Corrion seeks relief from the judgment so that he can correct his mistakes in the complaint,

which he claims were inadvertent and the result of excusable neglect. He alleges that he

failed to state the defendant’s name in paragraphs 5 and 8 of his complaint and that he

neglected to state in paragraph 17 that Judith Radditz and Officer Eldridge were being sued

in their personal and official capacities. He seeks to have the Court set aside its judgment

and allow him to file an amended complaint. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) “permits courts to reopen judgments for

reasons of ‘mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.’” Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co.

v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P’ship, 507 U.S. 380, 393 (1993). In order to obtain relief under

2:09-cv-11531-SJM-MJH Doc # 11 Filed 10/13/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 46
2

Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1), the moving party must demonstrate both the existence of mistake,

inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, and a meritorious claim or defense. Marshall

v. Monroe & Sons, Inc., 615 F.2d 1156, 1160 (6th Cir. 1980). Neither carelessness nor

ignorance of the law on the part of the moving party will justify relief under Fed. R. Civ. P.

60(b)(1). Saxion v. Titan-C-Mfg, Inc., 86 F.3d 553, 558 n.1 (6th Cir. 1996).

Corrion’s errors appear to be the result of carelessness or ignorance of the law, as

opposed to excusable neglect. Furthermore, prisoners may not alter or amend their

complaints to avoid a summary dismissal. See Baxter v. Rose, 305 F.3d 486, 488-89 (6th

Cir. 2002), abrogated on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. 199 (2007); Benson v.

O’Brian,179 F.3d 1014, 1016 (6th Cir. 1999); McGore v. Wrigglesworth, 114 F.3d 601, 612

(6th Cir. 1997), abrogated on other grounds by Jones v. Bock, 549 U.S. at 199.

Accordingly, Corrion’s motion for relief from judgment and to amend his complaint will be

denied. 

WHEREFORE, it hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for relief from judgment

and to amend his complaint (docket no. 8) is DENIED. 

SO ORDERED.

s/Stephen J. Murphy, III 

STEPHEN J. MURPHY, III

United States District Judge

Dated: October 13, 2009

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or

counsel of record on October 13, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Alissa Greer 

Case Manager

2:09-cv-11531-SJM-MJH Doc # 11 Filed 10/13/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 47
* Judge Widener did not participate in consideration of this

case. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 46(d).

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7239

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

FRED SHORES, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief

District Judge. (CR-90-49, CA-97-146-5-MU)

Submitted: January 7, 1999 Decided: January 19, 1999

Before WIDENER,* MURNAGHAN, and ERVIN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Fred Shores, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Brian Lee Whisler, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for

Appellee.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Fred Shores, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.

1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. See United States v. Shores, Nos. CR-90-49;

CA-97-146-5-MU (W.D.N.C. Aug. 6, 1998). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, Case no. 09-20297

v. 

HON. JOHN CORBETT O’MEARA

HOLLIE E. MAJEWSKI,

Defendant.

 /

STIPULATION AND ORDER

EXTENDING REPORTING DATE TO FEDERAL INSTITUTION

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED UPON between the above parties,

through their respective counsel, to extend Defendant’s reporting date to her federal

correctional institution of designation from October 15, 2012 until November 8, 2012.

s/ Stephen L. Hiyama (w/consent) s/ Andrew N. Wise 

Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorney for Defendant

211 W. Fort St., Ste. 2001 613 Abbott St., 5th Floor

Detroit, MI 48226 Detroit, MI 48226

(313) 226-9597 Phone: (313) 967-5830

stephen.hiyama@usdoj.gov andrew_wise@fd.org

SO ORDERED.

Date: September 27, 2012 s/John Corbett O'Meara

United States District Judge

5:09-cr-20297-JCO-VMM Doc # 66 Filed 09/27/12 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 351
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3955 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3955

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a refundable credit 
               to businesses which recycle office wastes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 2, 1996

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a refundable credit 
               to businesses which recycle office wastes.

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

SECTION 1. REFUNDABLE CREDIT FOR BUSINESSES WHICH RECYCLE OFFICE 
              WASTES.

    (a) In General.--Subpart C of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to refundable credits) 
is amended by redesignating section 35 as section 36 and by inserting 
after section 34 the following new section:

``SEC. 35. CREDIT FOR RECYCLING OFFICE WASTES.

    ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of a taxpayer engaged in a 
trade or business, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax 
imposed by this subtitle for the taxable year an amount equal to 3 
cents for each pound of office waste recycled by the taxpayer during 
the taxable year.
    ``(b) Office Waste.--For purposes of this section, the term `office 
waste' means glass, paper, cardboard, metal cans, and other office-
related products which are used in a trade or business conducted by the 
taxpayer.''
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such subpart C 
is amended by striking the last item and inserting the following new 
items:

                              ``Sec. 35. Credit for recycling office 
                                        wastes.
                              ``Sec. 36. Overpayments of tax.''
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to substances recycled after the date of the enactment of this 
Act in taxable years ending after such date.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.01    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 Endeavor Power Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alfonso Knoll, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:  (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 result of operations of the Company.      /s/ Alfonso Knoll By: Alfonso Knoll Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  Dated: November 15, 2010  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 418

AN ACT

For the relief of Arthur J. Carron, Jr.
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 418

AN ACT

For the relief of Arthur J. Carron, Jr.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 418 EH

1 SECTION 1. WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS.

2 The time limitations set forth in section 3702(b) of

3 title 31, United States Code, shall not apply with respect

4 to a claim by Arthur J. Carron, Jr., of Bark River, Michi5 gan, for amounts due to him by the Department of the

6 Navy. The amounts due are represented by the following

7 checks that were received but not negotiated by Arthur

8 J. Carron, Jr.:

9 (1) Treasury check number 2,831,843, dated

10 October 18, 1966, in the amount of $10,850.74 for

11 salary and expenses.

12 (2) Treasury check number 10,445,856, dated

13 January 29, 1971, in the amount of $1,361.00 for

14 salary and expenses.

15 (3) Treasury check number 71,681,041, dated

16 April 1, 1971, in the amount of $562.25 for retire17 ment pay.

18 SEC. 2. DEALINE.

19 Section 1 shall apply only if Arthur J. Carron, Jr.,

20 or his authorized representative, submits a claim pursuant
3

•HR 418 EH

1 to such section before the expiration of the 3-month period

2 beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives December 19,

1995.

Attest:

Clerk.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

MICHAEL AXELSON #510934,

Plaintiff, No. 2:09-CV-12514

-vs- Hon. Patrick J. Duggan

 Magistrate Michael Hluchaniuk

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, A

public corporation, Department of the Michigan State

Government and CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL

SERVICES, INC., a Michigan corporation, DR. MIAN

Z. QAYYUM, DR. KHAWAJA IKRAM, NURSE GREG

C. SOTTEK, R.N., and NURSE DALE KINNER,

jointly and severally,

Defendants.

_____________________________________/

LAWRENCE J. SCHLOSS (P 22972) BRIAN J. RICHTARCIK (P 49390)

Attorneys for Plaintiff RANDALL A. JUIP (P 58538)

50 Crocker Blvd., Suite 100 Attorneys for Defendant CMS

Mt. Clemens, MI 48043 645 Griswold, Suite 3850

(586)463-9911 Detroit, MI 48226

(313)589-5900

THOMAS E. KEENAN (P 25668)

Attorney for Greg C. Sottek, R.N., only A. PETER GOVORCHIN (P 31161)

4057 Pioneer Drive, Suite 300 Attorney for MDOC and Kinner

Commerce Township, MI 48390-1363 Mich. Dept. of Attorney General

(248)363-6400 P.O. Box 30217

Lansing, MI 48909

EDWARD C. CUTLIP, JR. (P 35836) (517)335-7021

Attorney for Defendant Ikram

500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 2500

Detroit, MI 48226

(313)961-0200

_____________________________________/

ORDER PERMITTING SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEYS

FOR DEFENDANT GREG C. SOTTEK, R.N., ONLY

2:09-cv-12514-PJD-MJH Doc # 29 Filed 09/28/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 194
In accordance with the foregoing Substitution of Attorneys and Consent (docket No.

28);

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that THOMAS E. KEENAN of PEDERSEN, KEENAN,

KING, WACHSBERG & ANDRZEJAK, P.C. may be and hereby is substituted as counsel

representing Defendant, GREG C. SOTTEK, R.N., only, in the above cause.

S/Patrick J. Duggan 

Patrick J. Duggan

United States District Judge

Dated: September 28, 2009

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on September 28, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/Marilyn Orem 

Case Manager

2:09-cv-12514-PJD-MJH Doc # 29 Filed 09/28/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 195
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PER SARBANES-OXLEY ACT (SECTION 906)








I am the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Northern Empire Energy Corp., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”).  I am delivering this certificate in connection with the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 and filed with the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“Form 10-Q”).





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:   February 4, 2014/s/ RANIERO CORSINIRaniero CorsiniTitle: Chief Executive Officer & Chief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

 SOUTHERN DIVISION

HON. PATRICK J. DUGGAN

CIVIL NO. 09-13176

LINDA REED,

Plaintiff(s),

-vDALTON DIRECT FLOORING CENTER, ET.AL,

Defendant(s).

 /

ORDER SETTING ASIDE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

At a session of said court, held in the

 United States Courthouse, in the City of

 Detroit, State of Michigan, on January 15, 2010.

 

 PRESENT: THE HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This Court having issued an Order to Show Cause for lack of progress and the 

Plaintiff having filed a Motion for Default Judgment , therefore;

IT IS ORDERED that the Court's Order to Show Cause as to

why this case should not be dismissed for lack of progress as to defendant Dalton Direct

Flooring Center be and the same is hereby SET ASIDE.

s/Patrick J. Duggan 

Patrick J. Duggan

United States District Judge

Dated: January 15, 2010

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on January 15, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Marilyn Orem 

Case Manager

2:09-cv-13176-PJD-MKM Doc # 22 Filed 01/15/10 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 121
#### Justine Elizabeth KEAVENY, Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent.

No. 70258.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

Dec. 24, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Feb. 5 and 19, 1997.

Application to Transfer Denied March 25, 1997.

Donald M. Witte, Warson Woods, for appellant.

Ronald D. Pridgin, Jefferson City, John Lasater, Clayton, for respondent.

Before CRAHAN, P.J., and GRIMM and HOFF, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Justine Keaveny, appeals the trial court’s judgment upholding the Director’s revocation of her Missouri driver’s license for accumulating 12 or more points in one year due to her conviction for driving while suspended. At trial, Appellant alleged that the revocation was improper because the suspension that gave rise to her conviction was improper. Appellant, however failed to file a timely petition for review of the earlier suspension.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          62,483
<SECURITIES>                                    50,498
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,226
<ALLOWANCES>                                       270
<INVENTORY>                                     11,578
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               155,528
<PP&E>                                          21,297
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,632
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 207,251
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,913
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            42
<OTHER-SE>                                     185,638
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   207,251
<SALES>                                        128,456
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               128,456
<CGS>                                           57,830
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   57,830
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                52,810
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    26
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  97
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 23,056
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,811
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,245
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,245
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .33


</TABLE>