alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. SEAL B, et al., Defendant—Appellant.

No. 01-50641.

D.C. # CR-89-00955-LEW/MLR.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*737Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 17, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Seal B appeals from his 135-month sentence imposed following the revocation of his probation. Pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), Seal B’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there are no arguable issues for review, and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed.

Our examination of the briefs and our independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 83, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), discloses no issues warranting review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not he cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 55064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22282]



[[Page 55064]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER08-1532-000; ER08-1537-000]


Avista Corporation NorthWestern Corporation; Notice of Filing

September 17, 2008.
    Take notice that on September 12, 2008, NorthWestern Corporation--
Montana Transmission Function together with Avista Corporation jointly 
filed a non-conforming long-term service agreement providing for the 
sale of Dynamic Capacity and Energy Service, Avista Corporation Rate 
Schedule 499 and NorthWestern Corporation FERC Rate Schedule 258.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or 
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#71373423323e1f1d181f14220401011e030531171403125f161e07"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="561013041519383a3f383305232626392422163033243578313920">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 pm Eastern Time on October 3, 2008.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-22282 Filed 9-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
IIB

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1766

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 12, 2001

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service

located at 4270 John Marr Drive in Annandale, Virginia,

as the ‘‘Stan Parris Post Office Building’’.

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

HR 1766 RFS

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 4270 John Marr Drive in Annandale, Virginia,

4 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Stan Parris Post

5 Office Building’’.

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

10 to the ‘‘Stan Parris Post Office Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives September 10,

2001.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.1

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 Autobytel Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 (the Report), we, James E. Riesenbach, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Monty A. Houdeshell, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 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/ James E. RiesenbachJames E. RiesenbachChief Executive OfficerMay 10, 2007




/s/ Monty A. HoudeshellMonty A. HoudeshellExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerMay 10, 2007


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Autobytel Inc. and will be retained by Autobytel
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.0



WRITTEN CERTIFICATION of

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER and CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT to 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



The undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial
Officer of EFJ, Inc. (the Company), each hereby certifies that, to the best of each of their knowledge:



the Companys Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending March 31, 2005 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/S/ Michael E. JalbertMichael E. JalbertChief Executive OfficerMay 03, 2005/S/ Jana Ahlfinger BellJana Ahlfinger BellChief Financial OfficerMay 03, 2005




The foregoing certification is
being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.
.'. .':. .:' '. . ..:: '.".' .' . . . '. '. .... '/~n'" ;.:4.." .. . r.. .'

..' ..../1,,,,, ....... ...- .........,. .... DATE

TO . .'. 11 r ¿ . Xl,;: . .'; ....,... . ...... ".. .'. .' d' .... CUST:~R:!: ~3

. .. .... 'd.: .... ,..,..... . ':C';.', ". ..... .... .:' './.:.: "". . "

- ~. ; ... .... " "..' ..' .....,.... .... y . .' 'v' j",' SALESPERSON

'. H" : '.' .'. .' . . : .:.....-.... . '. .' '. .' .... ..''''. .

'" . /, ...." H, . ......., .:,. ..' "H. ." "'.' 

, "'C"':' ..' ...: ',' '., .";.. ... ..' .... .'.'. ',' .', ..... . " .,'~, '.' VIA.,. "', .,~ '. .:'; '::','.' .'. '.' .' '..' -:"" i.,:;" ..', .:' '"" :

, ..,.. ..- ", . ": '.:: ,,'. ~ "." :./.' ,." '. ' '., ,. .;' ..,',- :, ,..... ,., '.' , "'..,' .- ".:" ..... . -,/. ....'..,., .:' ", '.'" ". ,,::.:' . .' . " , ".. ';.' ", .:', '. :. :.' ,,,.; ': ¿; c"- , ",' ".,...., ": ,.

.- .... ." :,::.:' . ',:":': .. ',: i

,.' ,

. .'. . . '.

....'- I.:. . - '. ," '.

. '. -'."

'...' ....' """',

. .... :.:: "

d.: ,'.::'.,

",

'.A -::;Q~ ';~;:!!

,,;

, ;~ '., ,', .--::"". '.,

. .' .,......, :., " . . .' . '

.... ". .,

.;'''' " .

..:,,'.' " .' "

'. .,.,:., ".,

., ....... :.,'.....

"".- . '. I"., .:':

~" .' ' ,-,'..:": ',~' .,.. 1 ;1_',:;" ",¡",";'. ;..J,.._ "/':.", l-,; '. "',

- . ':',"

~' I- ":

,

"5. t2~ lÌ

:. ~... ','

- . ''', ....

L

,."'.

"

~

,.,

,'. . " ,,::

::

:.

-

";''

-

..

~ 2

"2:

'. '. '.'

',', .

. ,..1 .

. ,-, , '. : '" ' . ,."':' ,.' '.:.' . " :'.' "., .: '.:

. '". '. .-

.', .' "";'-' '.' - ..'-- .'. .'. "" '. .' '.

";'" ,....,:.. ....'. ,....

"C'.".'.":

.' "'-. .... .' .

,",,/""", . '::; . .". . "." ".;'

" '~ .., ". 'Xi '~r;;i ' .:,_ ..'.,

" /;::.5':.

IY'

." "".

::;~~T .

;

. .",

'.

~

,.

~

L(

't"

',c/;:

'(~,: ....., ,:;;: ;,

\,

';'3

.

'. :'

..,

.,.,.,'

:.'"

;: ",'~'

.

., ,

. .":' ,'. .

.. ,:,"(,: :'. ':

. .""

"._,' , . _,,,

StateLine 020
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Walter Norton

v.

Cross Border Initiative Task Force, et al.

No. 06-fp-490

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows: the sum of $18.00 is due no later than

February 15, 2007. In addition, 20% of each preceding month’s

income credited to plaintiff’s account to be remitted by the U.S.

Penitentiary Canaan when the amount in the account exceeds $10.00

until the sum of $350.00 has been paid. Failure to pay the fee

as ordered will result in dismissal of the action without

prejudice. In all other respects plaintiff’s request for in

forma pauperis has been granted.

This case has been assigned civil number 06-cv-490-PB.

SO ORDERED.

______________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: January 11, 2007

cc: Walter Norton, pro se

Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

U.S. Penitentiary Canaan, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:06-cv-00490-PB Document 5 Filed 01/11/2007 Page 1 of 1

Norton v. Cross Border Initiative Task Force et al Doc. 5

Dockets.Justia.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Robert Breest

V .

NH Attorney General

No . 06-fp-36 1

O R D E R

Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U .S .C . § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows : the sum of $4 .51 is due no later than October

30, 2006 . In addition, 20% of each preceding month's income

credited to plaintiff's account to be remitted by MCI Shirley,

Medium when the amount in the account exceeds $10 .00 until the

sum of $350 .00 has been paid . Failure to pay the fee as ordered

will result in dismissal of the action without prejudice . In all

other respects plaintiff's request for in forma pauperis has been

granted .

This case has been assigned civil number 06-cv-361-SM .

SO ORDERED .

Date : September 28, 200 6

cc : Robert Breest, pro s e

Bonnie S . Reed, Financial Administrator

MCI Shirley, Medium, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:06-cv-00361-SM Document 4 Filed 09/28/2006 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32.1



CEO CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT



I, Ronald J. Buschur, Chief Executive Officer of Powerwave Technologies, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended July 3, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  |                                      
|--------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | --------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|                      |  |  | 
|Date: August 12, 2005 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ RONALD J. BUSCHUR
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | Ronald J. Buschur                    
|                      |  |  |  |    
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|                      |  |  |  |    
|                      |  |  |  |     |  |                       |  | Powerwave Technologies, Inc.
36

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1estate loans estate loans

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2002: Q2... 7.3 7.3 n.a. 7.1

 Q3... 7.2 7.2 n.a. 6.8

 Q4... 6.8 6.7 n.a. 6.5

2003: Q1... 6.7 6.6 n.a. 6.4

 Q2... 6.5 6.4 n.a. 6.0

 Q3... 6.5 6.4 n.a. 6.1

 Q4... 6.3 6.3 n.a. 6.1

2004: Q1... 6.3 6.2 n.a. 5.9

 Q2... 6.5 6.4 n.a. 6.2

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2002: Q2... 8.1 8.2 8.2 7.8

 Q3... 8.1 8.1 8.1 7.8

 Q4... 7.6 7.7 7.7 7.5

2003: Q1... 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.5

 Q2... 7.6 7.5 7.6 7.2

 Q3... 7.4 7.5 7.4 7.6

 Q4... 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2

2004: Q1... 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.0

 Q2... 7.2 7.2 7.3 7.1

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2002: Q2... 7.5 7.3 7.5 7.2

 Q3... 7.3 6.9 7.3 7.2

 Q4... 6.8 6.7 7.0 6.7

2003: Q1... 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6

 Q2... 6.8 6.4 6.4 6.4

 Q3... 6.3 6.1 6.3 6.5

 Q4... 6.5 6.5 6.9 6.7

2004: Q1... 6.6 6.4 6.7 6.3

 Q2... 6.9 6.4 6.5 6.5
37

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans (continued)

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1-estate loans estate loans

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2002: Q2... n.a. 8.1 8.0 7.7

 Q3... n.a. 7.9 7.9 7.5

 Q4... n.a. 7.6 7.6 7.2

2003: Q1... n.a. 7.4 7.5 7.0

 Q2... n.a. 7.3 7.3 6.9

 Q3... n.a. 7.2 7.3 6.8

 Q4... n.a. 7.1 7.2 6.8

2004: Q1... n.a. 7.0 7.1 6.7

 Q2... n.a. 7.1 7.1 6.8

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2002: Q2... n.a. 7.6 7.7 7.4

 Q3... n.a. 7.4 7.5 7.2

 Q4... n.a. 7.2 7.2 6.9

2003: Q1... n.a. 6.9 7.0 6.6

 Q2... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

 Q3... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

 Q4... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

2004: Q1... n.a. 6.6 6.7 6.4

 Q2... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA) 

2002: Q2... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

 Q3... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

 Q4... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.

2003: Q1... n.a. 6.9 7.6 7.5

 Q2... n.a. 6.5 7.1 7.0

 Q3... n.a. 6.5 7.0 7.2

 Q4... n.a. 6.5 6.9 7.3

2004: Q1... n.a. 6.4 7.1 7.2

 Q2... n.a. 6.8 7.2 7.1

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of

livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Cesar LUPIAN-BARAJAS, also known as Cesar Lupian Perez, also known as Lupian Cesar, Appellant.

No. 02-2777.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 7, 2003.

Decided Jan. 14, 2003.

Before McMILLIAN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Cesar Lupian-Barajas pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following his conviction for a crime of violence and deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b). During the plea hearing defense counsel predicted a sentencing range of 70 to 87 months; the magistrate judge1 acknowl*238edged counsel’s expertise with the Sentencing Guidelines, and stated that counsel’s prediction was not binding but was a “pretty good indicator of what’s likely to happen.” The later-calculated range was 77 to 96 months, and the district court2 imposed a sentence of 90 months imprisonment and *2*years supervised release. On appeal, counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the guilty plea was rendered involuntary because Mr. Lupian-Barajas was led to believe he would be sentenced within a lower Guidelines range.

We disagree, noting that the magistrate judge informed Mr. Lupian-Barajas of the statutory maximum sentence, and clearly warned him that the district court was not bound by defense counsel’s prediction. *See United States v. Granados,*168 F.3d 343, 345 (8th Cir.1999) (defendant’s reliance on attorney’s mistaken impression about length of sentence is insufficient to render plea involuntary as long as court informed defendant of maximum possible sentence). Upon reviewing the record independently under *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm. We also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Paul A. Zoss, United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of *238Iowa, to whom the case was referred by consent of the parties for proceedings required by Fed.R.Crim.P. 11.

2

. The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Gerard Joseph Bean

v. Civil No. 07-cv-328-JL

Northern NH Correctional Facility, Warden

O R D E R

Plaintiff's Motion for the First Trial Transcript, Document #74, is granted. The deputy clerk

has contacted Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth Woodcock and asked that she provide the Court

with a copy. Attorney Woodcock has agreed to do so. 

Once the Court receives this courtesy copy, it will provide the petitioner with a copy. 

SO ORDERED.

September 15, 2010 _________________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

cc: Gerard Joseph Bean, pro se

Elizabeth Woodcock, Esq.

Case 1:07-cv-00328-JL Document 80 Filed 09/15/10 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Marine Polymer Technologies, Inc.

v. Civil No. 06-cv-100-JD

HemCon, Inc.

Procedural Order

Two issues have come to the court’s attention pertaining to

the parties’ recent filings. In the context of the proposed jury

instructions, the parties have pointed out a typographical error

in the conclusion of the court’s claim construction order, which

was issued on May 6, 2008. Therefore, pages 24 to 25 of the

claim construction order are amended to correct the typographical

error as follows:

The terms biocompatible poly-ß-164-N-acetylglucosamine and

biocompatible poly-ß-164-glucosamine, as used in the claims of

the ‘245 patent, are construed to mean:

polymers with their stated compositions (biocompatible polyß-164-N-acetylglucosamine and biocompatible poly-ß-164-

glucosamine) and with low variability, high purity, and no

detectable biological reactivity as determined by

biocompatibility tests.

Case 1:06-cv-00100-JD Document 318 Filed 04/19/10 Page 1 of 2
In addition, HemCon’s proposed findings and conclusions do

not distinguish between factual findings and rulings of law. 

HemCon shall file a revised proposed findings and rulings that

properly distinguishes between its requests for findings of fact

and its requests for legal conclusions. The requests for legal

conclusions shall be supported by appropriate case citations. 

The revised proposed findings and conclusions shall be filed no

later than 5:00 p.m. on Tuesday, April 20, 2010.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

United States District Judge

April 19, 2010

cc: Julie M. Baher, Esquire

Garet K. Galster, Esquire

Daniel R. Johnson, Esquire

Heather E. Krans, Esquire

Joseph A. Kromholz, Esquire

Lynda Q. Nguyen, Esquire

Brian M. Poissant, Esquire

Daniel D. Ryan, Esquire

Ognian V. Shentov, Esquire

Jonathan M. Shirley, Esquire

Daniel E. Will, Esquire

Leigh S. Willey, Esquire

2

Case 1:06-cv-00100-JD Document 318 Filed 04/19/10 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Criminal No. 07-cr-114-01-PB

Andrew Innes

O R D E R

On August 8, 2012, defendant appeared for a probable cause 

hearing under Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.1 on one alleged violation of 

conditions of supervision, as charged in the government's 

petition dated August 7, 2012 (doc. no. 45). Defendant is on 

release from his conviction in 2008 on five counts of 

distribution of cocaine base “crack,” in violation of 21 U.S.C. 

841(a)(1).

Defendant stipulated to probable cause on the violation. I 

therefore find probable cause that defendant has violated the 

condition as charged in the petition.

Defendant sought bail conditions under Rule 32.1(a)(6). The 

government sought detention. Under Rule 32.1(a)(6), defendant 

bears the burden of establishing by clear and convincing 

evidence that he will not flee and that he poses no danger to 

any other person or to the community. At the hearing, the court 

summarized its findings orally from the bench. Those oral 

findings are incorporated herein. Based on the evidence 

presented at today's hearing, and for the reasons stated on the 

Case 1:07-cr-00114-PB Document 47 Filed 08/09/12 Page 1 of 2
2

record, defendant has failed to meet his burden of persuading 

the court that he poses no danger to any other person or to the 

community. 

In sum, the court finds that defendant did not meet his 

burden to show by clear and convincing evidence that his

release, even on strict conditions, would pose no danger to any 

other person or the community. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that 

the defendant be detained pending a final revocation hearing. 

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney 

General or his 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 shall 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 shall deliver the defendant to the United 

States Marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection 

with a court proceeding. 

SO ORDERED.

 

Landya B. McCafferty

United States Magistrate Judge

August 9, 2012 

cc: Robert J. Veiga, Esq.

Matthew G. Stachowski, Esq.

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:07-cr-00114-PB Document 47 Filed 08/09/12 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Gerald Boulanger

v. Civil No. 06-cv-308-PB

US Bureau of Prisons, Director, et al

RECUSAL O R D E R

For reasons I outlined during the last status conference, I recuse myself from this case and

direct the clerk to assign it to a different judge.

SO ORDERED.

October 19, 2009 /s/ Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbadoro

United States District Judge

cc: Gerald Boulanger, pro se

Corey M. Belobrow, Esq.

Case 1:06-cv-00308-SM Document 91 Filed 10/19/09 Page 1 of 1