alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AO 472 (Rev. 11/16), modified by NED (9/17) 

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. Case No. 8:23mj308

CIPRIAN AMARIUTEI, ORDER OF DETENTION PENDING TRIAL

Defendant

Part I - Eligibility for Detention

Upon the

☒ Motion of the Government attorney pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f)(1), 

the Court held a detention hearing and found that detention is warranted. 

This order sets forth the Court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i), in 

addition to any other findings made at the hearing.

Part II - Findings of Fact and Law as to Presumptions under § 3142(e)

Part III - Analysis and Statement of the Reasons for Detention

After considering the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g) and the information presented at the detention hearing, 

the Court concludes that the defendant must be detained pending trial because the Government has proven:

☒ By clear and convincing evidence that no condition or combination of conditions of release will reasonably assure

the safety of any other person and the community.

☒ By a preponderance of evidence that no condition or combination of conditions of release will reasonably assure the 

defendant’s appearance as required.

In addition to any findings made on the record at the hearing, the reasons for detention include the following:

☒ Weight of evidence against the defendant is strong

☒ Subject to lengthy period of incarceration if convicted

☒ Prior criminal history

☒ Participation in criminal activity while on probation, parole, or supervision

☒ Lack of stable employment

☒ Lack of stable residence

☒ Lack of significant community or family ties to this district

☒ Significant family or other ties outside the United States

☒ Lack of legal status in the United States

☒ Subject to removal or deportation after serving any period of incarceration

☒ Use of alias(es) or false documents

☒ Background information unknown or unverified

OTHER REASONS OR FURTHER EXPLANATION:

Part IV - Directions Regarding Detention

8:23-mj-00308-MDN Doc # 13 Filed: 05/23/23 Page 1 of 2 - Page ID # 22
Page 2 of 2

The defendant is remanded to the custody of the Attorney General or to the Attorney General’s designated representative 

for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or 

being held in custody pending appeal. The defendant must be afforded a reasonable opportunity for private consultation 

with defense counsel. On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, the person 

in charge of the corrections facility must deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance 

in connection with a court proceeding.

Date: 5/23/2023 s/ Susan M. Bazis

United States Magistrate Judge

8:23-mj-00308-MDN Doc # 13 Filed: 05/23/23 Page 2 of 2 - Page ID # 23
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

************************************* 

Karen Cook, * 

 * 

 Plaintiff-Respondent * 

 * Civil Action No. 1:06-cv-58-JD 

v. * 

 * 

CTC Communications Corp., * 

 * 

 Defendant-Petitioner * 

************************************* 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXCLUDE MICHAEL LOSEY AS EXPERT

NOW COMES the Plaintiff Karen Cook, by and through her attorneys Upton & Hatfield, 

LLP, and respectfully submits her Motion to Exclude Michael Losey as Expert. In support of 

said Motion, Plaintiff attaches her Memorandum of Law and related exhibits. 

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court: 

A. Grants this Motion to Exclude Michael Losey as Expert; and 

B. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems appropriate. 

Respectfully submitted, 

KAREN COOK 

By Her Attorneys 

UPTON & HATFIELD, L.L.P. 

Date: August 8, 2007 By /s/ Lauren S. Irwin 

 Lauren S. Irwin, Bar No. 10544 

 Heather M. Burns, Bar No. 8799 

 10 Centre Street., Box 1090 

 Concord, NH 03302-1090 

 Tel.: 603-224-7791 

 Email: lirwin@upton-hatfield.com 

 

Case 1:06-cv-00058-JD Document 58 Filed 08/08/07 Page 1 of 2
 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing was filed with the United States District Court for the 

District of New Hampshire through its Electronic Case Filing System, and served on all parties 

electronically. 

Date: August 8, 2007 /s/ Lauren S. Irwin____________

 Lauren S. Irwin 

Case 1:06-cv-00058-JD Document 58 Filed 08/08/07 Page 2 of 2
#### Ricardo D. ARRIOLA, Petitioner, v. John D. ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 02-70689. INS No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 21, 2003.*

Decided July 28, 2003.

*686Before LEAVY, HAWKINS and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument and denies Arriola’s request for oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Ricardo D. Arriola, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, *Gonzalez v. INS,*82 F.3d 903, 907-908 (9th Cir.1996), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Arriola failed to prove that he was persecuted, or has a well-founded fear of future persecution, on account of an enumerated ground. *See INS v. Elias-Zacarias,*502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Arriola testified that the New People’s Army demanded money and professional services from him, but he failed to demonstrate that he suffered this treatment because of his actual or imputed political opinion. *See id.*

It follows that Arriola failed to satisfy the more stringent standard to establish eligibility for withholding of removal. *See Pedro-Mateo v. INS,*224 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.2000).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         210,225
<SECURITIES>                                   111,002
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,305,482
<ALLOWANCES>                                 6,979,785
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,681,923
<PP&E>                                         440,003
<DEPRECIATION>                                 258,026
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,865,300
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,845,568
<BONDS>                                        298,740
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,161
<COMMON>                                           951
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,279,008)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,865,300
<SALES>                                      4,396,130
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,396,130
<CGS>                                        3,761,204
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,761,204
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               722,090
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,559,344
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             136,104
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,780,265)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,780,265)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,780,265)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.34)


</TABLE>
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [FEMA-3292-EM]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of an emergency for the State of Alabama (FEMA-3292-EM), dated August 30, 2008, and related determinations.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         September 3, 2008.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this emergency is closed effective September 3, 2008.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)

R. David Paulison,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. E8-21772 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 15


                           ACCOUNTANTS' ACKNOWLEDGMENT


Linens 'n Things, Inc.
Clifton, New Jersey

Board of Directors:

Re:  Registration Statements Numbers 333-71903, 333-42874, 333-55803, 333-62982
     and 333-62984 on Form S-8

With respect to the subject registration statements, we acknowledge our
awareness of the use therein of our report dated May 3, 2004 related to our
review of interim financial information.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, such report is not
considered a part of a registration statement prepared or certified by an
accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning
of sections 7 and 11 of the Securities Act of 1933.




/S/ KPMG LLP

KPMG LLP

New York, New York
May 7, 2004



                                       21
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Linens Holding Co. for thequarterly period ended July 1, 2006 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Robert J. DiNicola, as ChiefExecutive Officer of Linens Holding Co., and Francis M. Rowan, as ChiefFinancial Officer, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, tothe best of his knowledge:

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

(2)The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of Linens HoldingCo.

 
| /s/ Robert J. DiNicola |       |                      |
|------------------------|------------|---------------------------|
| **Name:**              | ** ** | Robert J. DiNicola        |   |   |
| **Title:**             | ** ** | Chairman and Chief        |   |   |
|                   |       | Executive Officer         |   |   |
| **Date:**              | ** ** | August 15, 2006           |   |   |
| ** **             | ** ** |                      |   |   |
| ** **             | ** ** |                      |   |   |
| /s/ Francis M.  Rowan  |       |                      |
| **Name:**              | ** ** | Francis M. Rowan          |   |   |
| **Title:**             | ** ** | Senior Vice President and |   |   |
|                   |       | Chief Financial Officer   |   |   |
| **Date:**              | ** ** | August 15, 2006           |   |   |

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 06-cr-071-JD

Elaine A. Brown and

Edward Lewis Brown

SEALED ORDER

The United States of America has filed a verified ex parte

application pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 982(b)(1) and 21 U.S.C. §

853(e)(1) for a post-indictment restraining order on two parcels

of real property, which are named in the Notice of Forfeiture in

the indictment in this case. The government applies for the

order to protect those parcels of property through the duration

of this criminal proceeding in order to preserve them for

forfeiture. The government asserts that such an order may be

issued based on the grand jury’s indictment of Elaine A. Brown

and Edward Lewis Brown. The government, however, has not

provided sufficient briefing to support such an order.

In particular, the government has not addressed the due

process concerns that other courts have recognized may be

implicated by an ex parte restraining order imposed for an

unlimited duration, without an opportunity provided to interested

parties to be heard. See, e.g., United States v. Holy Land

Case 1:06-cr-00071-SM Document 8 Filed 04/19/06 Page 1 of 2
2

Found. for Relief & Dev., 2006 WL 853334 (5th Cir. Apr. 4, 2006)

(discussing issue and citing cases). Although the First Circuit

has not directly addressed the due process concerns that have

been raised in applying § 853(e)(1), that court has noted the

issue of “whether the Due Process Clause may sometimes require

that interested parties be given an opportunity to challenge a

restraining order, on the merits of the indictment if necessary,

before the entry of forfeiture.” United States v. Real Prop. in

Waterboro, 64 F.3d 752, 757 (1st Cir. 1995) (citing cases).

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the government’s ex parte

application (document no. 7) is denied without prejudice to

refile along with supplemental briefing that sufficiently

addresses the issues and cases noted in this order. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

April 19, 2006

cc: Jean B. Weld, Esquire

Case 1:06-cr-00071-SM Document 8 Filed 04/19/06 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Eunice Kenney

v. No. 06-fp-020

Academy Collection Service, Inc.

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is hereby

granted, but only for the purpose of waiving the filing fee. 

This case has been assigned civil number 06-cv-020-JM. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge 

Date: January 24, 2006

cc: Joanne T. Petito, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00020-JD Document 3 Filed 01/24/2006 Page 1 of 1

Kenney v. Academy Collection Service, Inc. Doc. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1211

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to restore a 100 percent

deduction for business meals and entertainment and to restore the deduction for the travel expenses of a taxpayer’s spouse who accompanies

the taxpayer on business travel.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 27, 2001

Mr. ABERCROMBIE 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 restore

a 100 percent deduction for business meals and entertainment and to restore the deduction for the travel

expenses of a taxpayer’s spouse who accompanies the

taxpayer on business travel.

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 ‘‘Tourism Revitalization

5 Act of 2001’’.
2

•HR 1211 IH

1 SEC. 2. RESTORATION OF DEDUCTION FOR BUSINESS

2 MEALS AND ENTERTAINMENT.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 274 of the Internal Rev4 enue Code of 1986 is amended by striking subsection (n)

5 (relating to only 50 percent of meal and entertainment

6 expenses allowed as deduction) and by redesignating sub7 section (o) as subsection (n).

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

9 this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after

10 the date of the enactment of this Act.

11 SEC. 3. RESTORATION OF DEDUCTION FOR TRAVEL EX12 PENSES OF SPOUSE, ETC. ACCOMPANYING

13 TAXPAYER ON BUSINESS TRAVEL.

14 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (m) of section 274 of

15 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to additional

16 limitations on travel expenses) is amended by striking

17 paragraph (3).

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

19 this section shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after

20 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### WEISS et al. v. CIOLINO.

No. 18516.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Oct. 23, 1946.

William C. Orchard and Paul J. May-beno, both of New Orleans, for plaintiffs-anpellants.

Tolmas & Tolmas and A. P. Schiro, III, all of New Orleans, La., for defendant-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Considering the joint motion of appellants and appellee wherein it is shown that .the amount involved in this cause exceeds the jurisdictional limit of this court and that the Supreme Court of Louisiana is vested with appellate jurisdiction.

It is Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that this appeal be and it is transferred to the Supreme Court of Louisiana to be disposed of according to law; the transfer to be made within 60 days after this judgment becomes final and, if not so made, then the appeal to be dismissed. Appellants are to pay the cost of appeal in this court, other costs to await final determination of the matter.

Appeal transferred to the supreme court.
April 1 , 2014



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

RUFUS ANTONIO ESCOBE DO , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00221

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. The record indicates that the appeal should be DISMISSED. The Court orders the ap peal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.
We further order this decision certified below for observance.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENT AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-04-1996             AUG-04-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-03-1997             AUG-05-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-04-1997             MAY-04-1997
<CASH>                                           8,693                   8,693
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,922                  19,922
<ALLOWANCES>                                       879                     879
<INVENTORY>                                        952                     952
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,666                   1,666
<PP&E>                                         116,957                 116,957
<DEPRECIATION>                                  28,059                  28,059
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 125,246                 125,246
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,294                  24,294
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        41,810                  41,810
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,749                   7,749
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   125,246                 125,246
<SALES>                                         23,728                  61,753
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,728                  61,753
<CGS>                                           14,196                  38,337
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,196                  38,337
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,246                  18,989
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,060                   3,472
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,226                     955
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,226                     955
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,226                     955
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.12                    0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12                    0.12
        

</TABLE>