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

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

JEFFREY EDWARDS, 

Defendant. 

8:23CR124 

ORDER 

 

The undersigned magistrate judge held a telephone status conference with the attorneys 

regarding the progression of this case. Defendant made an Oral Motion to Continue the Telephone 

Status Conference because defense counsel needs additional time to review the extensive 

discovery in this case. The Oral Motion to Continue is unopposed. Based on the comments of 

counsel on the telephone conference, the court finds Defendant’s Unopposed Oral Motion to 

Continue the Telephone Status Conference should be granted. Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED: 

1) Defendant’s Unopposed Oral Motion to Continue the Telephone Status Conference 

is granted. 

2) The Telephone Status Conference with counsel to discuss the progression of this 

case is continued to August 8, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. before the undersigned magistrate 

judge. Counsel for the parties shall use Restricted Order [25] for conference 

connection instructions to participate in the call. 

3) In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), the court finds that the ends of 

justice will be served by granting this continuance and outweigh the interests of the 

public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Any additional time arising as a result 

of the granting of this motion, that is, the time between today’s date and August 8, 

2024, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the 

requirement of the Speedy Trial Act. Failure to grant a continuance would deny 

counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account 

the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B)(iv). Failing to 

timely object to this order as provided under this court’s local rules will be deemed 

a waiver of any right to later claim the time should not have been excluded under 

the Speedy Trial Act. 

 Dated this 17th day of April, 2024. 

BY THE COURT: 

s/ Michael D. Nelson 

United States Magistrate Judge 

8:23-cr-00124-RFR-MDN Doc # 27 Filed: 04/17/24 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID # 47
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 27 (Friday, February 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7572-7573]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2299]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Accreditation and Approval of SGS North America, Inc., as a 
Commercial Gauger and Laboratory

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security.

ACTION: Notice of accreditation and approval of SGS North America, 
Inc., as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 
CFR 151.13, SGS North America, Inc., 3735 W. Airline Hwy., Reserve, LA 
70084, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and 
petroleum products, organic chemicals and vegetable oils for customs 
purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 
151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory 
analyses and gauger services should request and receive written 
assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or 
gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the 
specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved 
to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by 
calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to 
[email protected]. Please reference the Web site listed below for a 
complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. 
http://cbp.gov/xp/cgov/import/operations_support/labs_scientific_svcs/commercial_gaugers/.

DATES: The accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as 
commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on May 5, 2005. The 
next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for May 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commercial Gauger Laboratory Program 
Manager, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 
20229, (202) 344-1060.

[[Page 7573]]

    Dated: January 31, 2008.
Ira S. Reese,
Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.
 [FR Doc. E8-2299 Filed 2-7-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 09-cr-08-01-SM

Cesar Abreu

O R D E R

Defendant's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 11) is

granted. Trial has been rescheduled for the May 2009 trial period. Defendant shall

file a Waiver of Speedy Trial Rights not later than March 16, 2009. On the filing of

such waiver, his continuance shall be effective.

The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C.

§ 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny

the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into

account the exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Case 1:09-cr-00008-SM Document 12 Filed 03/05/09 Page 1 of 2
2

Final Pretrial Conference: May 12, 2009 at 4:30 PM 

Jury Selection: May 19, 2009 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

March 5, 2009 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Counsel of Record

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:09-cr-00008-SM Document 12 Filed 03/05/09 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 10.98

  February 4, 1999



  Aloe Commodities International, Inc.
  12901 Nicholson, Suite 370
  Farmers Branch, Texas  75234

  Gentlemen:

       Reference is made to the Promissory Note dated June 17, 1998 of Aloe
  Commodities  International,  Inc.,  a  Texas  corporation  (the "Maker"),
  payable  to  the  order  of  Carrington   Laboratories,   Inc.,  a  Texas
  corporation  (the  "Payee"), in the original principal amount of $200,000
  (the "Note"), as amended by three letter agreements between the Maker and
  the Payee dated September 30, 1998, November 4, 1998 and January 15, 1999
  (collectively,  the  "Prior  Amendments"), the last of which extended the
  Final  Due Date of the Note to February 5, 1999.  The Maker and the Payee
  now desire to amend the Note in the additional respects set forth below.

       Accordingly, the Maker and the Payee hereby agree as follows:

       1.   The  third  paragraph  on  the first page of the Note is hereby
       amended, effective as  of  June  17,  1998,  to read in its entirety
       as follows:

            The  principal  of  and  interest on this Note shall be due and
       payable  on  February  4, 2000 (the "Final Due Date"), on which date
       all  unpaid  principal of and accrued interest on this Note shall be
       due and payable.

       2.   The  Note  is further amended, effective as of the date of this
       letter  agreement, by  inserting  on the first page thereof, between
       the fourth  and  fifth paragraphs,  a new paragraph which shall read
       in its entirety as follows:

            The Maker hereby pledges and assigns to the Payee and grants to
       the  Payee  a  continuing  security  interest  in  200,000 shares of
       capital  stock,  par  value  $0.05 U.S. per share, of Aloe and Herbs
       International  Inc.,  a  Panamanian  corporation,  and  all proceeds
       thereof,  to  secure  the full and timely payment of all sums now or
       hereafter  owed  by the Maker under this Note.  The Payee shall have
       all  rights  and  remedies  available  to it under the Texas Uniform
       Commercial Code.
       
<PAGE>
          Aloe Commodities International, Inc.
                 February 4, 1999
                 Page 2



        3.   This letter agreement shall  supersede  the  Prior Amendments,
        and the  Note  shall remain in full force and effect as  originally
        written, except as amended by this letter agreement.

             Please  indicate  your  agreement  to the terms of this letter
        agreement by signing the enclosed  copy of this letter in the space
        provided below and returning that copy to the undersigned.


                                   CARRINGTON LABORATORIES, INC.




                                   By:  \s\ Robert W. Schnitzius      
                     
                                   Robert W. Schnitzius
                                   Treasurer  and Chief Financial Officer


          Agreed to in all respects:

          ALOE COMMODITIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.


          By:  \s\ L. Scott McKnight               
          L. Scott McKnight
          President
*Release Date: March 31, 2009*

*Other formats:*
ASCII (4 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (1 KB)

----

```
C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans
Percent
```

| Quarter | Other operating loans1 | Intermediate non-real-estate loans | Long-term real estate loans |
|---------|------------------------|------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
||
| 9.0     | 8.8                    | 8.3                                |
| 8.9     | 8.8                    | 8.2                                |
| 8.8     | 8.7                    | 8.2                                |
| 8.7     | 8.6                    | 8.2                                |
| 8.2     | 8.1                    | 7.6                                |
| 6.9     | 7.0                    | 6.6                                |
| 6.6     | 6.7                    | 6.4                                |
| 6.7     | 6.8                    | 6.5                                |
| 6.2     | 6.4                    | 6.1                                |
||
| 9.2     | 8.9                    | 8.3                                |
| 9.1     | 8.8                    | 8.3                                |
| 9.1     | 8.8                    | 8.2                                |
| 9.0     | 8.7                    | 8.1                                |
| 8.5     | 8.2                    | 7.7                                |
| 7.4     | 7.2                    | 6.7                                |
| 7.1     | 6.9                    | 6.6                                |
| 7.0     | 6.9                    | 6.5                                |
| 6.7     | 6.7                    | 6.4                                |
||
| 9.4     | 9.4                    | 8.8                                |
| 9.2     | 9.3                    | 8.6                                |
| 9.4     | 9.5                    | 9.3                                |
| 9.1     | 8.9                    | 8.8                                |
| 8.3     | 8.4                    | 8.4                                |
| 7.5     | 7.6                    | 7.7                                |
| 6.6     | 6.8                    | 6.8                                |
| 6.8     | 7.3                    | 7.1                                |
| 5.5     | 5.9                    | 5.8                                |
```
1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses
and the care and feeding of livestock (including poultry). Return to table
   * 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.
```

*Other formats:*
ASCII (4 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (1 KB)

Statistical releases

----

HomeEconomic research and dataAccessibilityContact Us
#### In the Matter of Cathleen Tokarz, Also Known as Fenty, Respondent-Appellant, v Michael Loughlin, Appellant-Respondent.

[807 NYS2d 312]

*717In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (James, R), dated April 7, 2005, which, after a hearing, denied his petition to prevent the mother from relocating to Charlottesville, Virginia, with the parties’ daughter, and for custody, and granted the mother’s petition for permission to relocate, and the mother cross-appeals from the same order.

Ordered that the cross appeal is dismissed as abandoned *(see*22 NYCRR 670.8 [c], [e]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the mother.

The Family Court properly granted the mother permission to relocate to Charlottesville, Virginia, with the parties’ child, having considered the relevant factors and found that it was in the child’s best interests *(see Matter of Tropea v Tropea,*87 NY2d 727 [1996]; *Matter of Tabernuro v Jones,*23 AD3d 667 [2005]; *Matter of Vega v Pollack,*21 AD3d 495 [2005]; *Aziz v Aziz,*8 AD3d 596 [2004]). The court also properly denied the father’s request for a change in custody in light of the totality of the circumstances, considering, among other factors, that the child was happy and healthy, and had formed close bonds with her stepfather and half sister *(see Matter of Belbol v Stevenson,*23 AD3d 555 [2005]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Cozier, J.P., Santucci, Spolzino and Skelos, JJ., concur.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-15-00148-CV

HOUSE OF PRAISE MINISTRIES, INC.,

Appellant

v.

CITY OF RED OAK, TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 40th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 87580

ORDER

This appeal was referred to mediation by order dated January 28, 2016. Mediation 

was ordered to occur within 30 days, but by order of the Court, that time was extended 

to April 29, 2016. We have received a Joint Agreed Motion to Stay the Appeal from the 

parties requesting a stay so that the parties could investigate and confirm facts and 

reconvene for mediation scheduled for May 23, 2016. 
House of Praise Ministries, Inc. v. City of Red Oak, Texas Page 2

The parties’ joint motion is granted. The time for mediation is extended and is 

ordered to occur by May 31, 2016.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Motion granted

Order issued and filed April 14, 2016
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2128

To provide market loss assistance to apple producers.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 12, 2001

Mr. HINCHEY (for himself, Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, Mr. WALSH, Mr.

REYNOLDS, and Mr. SWEENEY) introduced the following bill; which was

referred to the Committee on Agriculture

A BILL

To provide market loss assistance to apple producers.

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

3 SECTION 1. MARKET LOSS ASSISTANCE FOR APPLE PRO4 DUCERS.

5 (a) ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE.—The Secretary of Agri6 culture shall use $250,000,000 of funds of the Commodity

7 Credit Corporation to make payments as soon as possible

8 after the date of the enactment of this Act to apple pro9 ducers to provide relief for the loss of markets for their

10 2000 crop.
2

•HR 2128 IH

1 (b) PAYMENT BASIS.—The amount of the payment

2 to a producer under subsection (a) shall be made on a

3 per pound basis equal to each qualifying producer’s 2000

4 production of apples, except that the Secretary shall not

5 make payments for that amount of a particular farm’s

6 apple production that is in excess of 20,000,000 pounds.

7 (c) DUPLICATIVE PAYMENTS.—A producer shall be

8 ineligible for payments under this section with respect to

9 a market loss for apples to the extent of that amount that

10 the producer received as compensation or assistance for

11 the same loss under any other Federal program, other

12 than under the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7 U.S.C.

13 1501 et seq.).

14 (d) OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The Sec15 retary shall not establish any terms or conditions for pro16 ducer eligibility, such as limits based upon gross income,

17 other than those specified in this section.

18 (e) APPLICABILITY.—This section applies only with

19 respect to the 2000 crop of apples and producers of that

20 crop.

Æ
107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1696

AN ACT

To expedite the construction of the World War II

memorial in the District of Columbia.

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1696

AN ACT

To expedite the construction of the World War II memorial

in the District of Columbia.

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

•HR 1696 EH

1 SECTION 1. EXPEDITED COMMENCEMENT BY AMERICAN

2 BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION OF CON3 STRUCTION OF WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL.

4 Section 2113 of title 36, United States Code, as

5 added by section 601(a) of the Veterans Millennium

6 Health Care and Benefits Act (Public Law 106–117; 113

7 Stat. 1576), is amended by adding at the end the following

8 new subsection:

9 ‘‘(i) CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTION TO COMMENCE

10 CONSTRUCTION.—(1) The requirements of the National

11 Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et

12 seq.), the Commemorative Works Act (40 U.S.C. 1001 et

13 seq.), and all other laws pertaining to the siting and design

14 for the World War II memorial having been met, the Com15 mission shall expeditiously proceed with the construction

16 of the World War II memorial at the dedicated Rainbow

17 Pool site in the District of Columbia.

18 ‘‘(2) The construction of the World War II memorial

19 authorized by paragraph (1) shall be consistent with—

20 ‘‘(A) the final architectural submission made to

21 the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Cap22 ital Planning Commission on June 30, 2000, as sup23 plemented on November 2, 2000; and

24 ‘‘(B) such reasonable construction permit re25 quirements as may be required by the Secretary of
3

•HR 1696 EH

1 the Interior, acting through the National Park Serv2 ice.

3 ‘‘(3) The decision to construct the World War II me4 morial at the dedicated Rainbow Pool site, decisions imple5 menting this subsection, and decisions regarding the de6 sign for the World War II memorial are final and conclu7 sive and shall not be subject to administrative or judicial

8 review.’’.

Passed the House of Representatives May 15, 2001.

Attest:

Clerk.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America ,

Plaintiff

v . 07-cr-146-01-SM

John Collins,

Defendant

ORDE R

Defendant Collins's motion to continue the final pretrial conference and

trial is granted (document no . 8). Defendant Collins has filed a Waiver of

Speedy Trial . Trial has been rescheduled for the month of December, 2007 .

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial ,

18 U.S .C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances.

Case 1:07-cr-00146-SM Document 10 Filed 08/21/07 Page 1 of 2
Final Pretrial Conference is rescheduled for November 26, 2007 at

3 :30 p .m. in Room 421 .

Jury selection will take place on December 4, 2007 at 9 :30 a.m.

SO ORDERED .

August 21, 2007

cc : Jessica C. Brown, Esq.

Helen W. Fitzgibbon, AUSA

U.S . Marshal

U.S . Probation

2

Case 1:07-cr-00146-SM Document 10 Filed 08/21/07 Page 2 of 2
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40501

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ROSALINDA SAENZ

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:04-CR-375-1

Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Rosalinda Saenz

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Saenz has not filed a response. Our

independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous

issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 6, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

 |

Debra Franchi, Individually and | 

as Parent and Guardian of CF | 

Plaintiff | 

| 

v. | Civ. No. 1:08-CV-395-JL 

| 

New Hampton School | 

Defendant | 

 |

OBJECTION AND MOTION TO STRIKE 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES #15 and #16.

NOW COMES the Plaintiff, Debra Franchi, individually and a/p/n/g to CF, by 

and through her attorneys, Wiggin & Nourie, P.A., and objects to two of Defendant’s 

affirmative defenses and asks the Court to strike these defenses. In support thereof, 

Plaintiff states as follows: 

1. Plaintiffs filed this suit in September 2008. As such, this suit has been 

pending for nearly two years. Defendant seeks to assert additional affirmative defenses at 

this late juncture. Plaintiff, in the spirit of cooperation, assented to 14 of Defendant’s 16 

affirmative defenses despite the fact that they were untimely. 

2. Plaintiffs’ counsel asked Defendant to offer a good faith basis for asserting 

affirmative defense #15 and affirmative defense #16. Affirmative defense #15 asserts that 

Plaintiff failed to exhaust all administrative remedies. Affirmative defense #16 asserts 

that Plaintiff’s claim is untimely under relevant state or federal statutes. 

3. These two affirmative defenses are new. At no time during the nearly two 

years that this case has been pending has Defendant asserted that Plaintiff failed to 

Case 1:08-cv-00395-JL Document 36 Filed 05/28/10 Page 1 of 3
2

exhaust administrative remedies nor has Defendant asserted that Plaintiff’s claim is 

untimely under state or federal statutes. 

4. Plaintiff objects to these defenses because they are untimely and because 

Defendant failed to provide a good faith basis for asserting the defenses. 

5. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(c), the Defendant’s attorney does not consent. 

6. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(2), no separate Memorandum of Law is 

necessary because the relief requested in this motion is within the discretion of this 

Honorable Court. 

7. Pursuant to Local Rule 7.2(a), the granting of this motion will not result in 

the continuance of any hearing, conference, or trial. 

WHEREFORE Plaintiffs pray that this Honorable Court: 

A. Strike Affirmative Defense #15; 

B. Strike Affirmative Defense #16; and 

C. Grant such other relief as is just and equitable. 

 Respectfully Submitted, 

 Debra Franchi, Individually and a/p/n/g to CF

 By and through her attorneys, 

 WIGGIN & NOURIE, P.A. 

May 28, 2010 /s/ Donna-Marie Cote_____________ 

 Peter E. Hutchins, Esq. (NH Bar ID #1231) 

 Donna-Marie Cote, Esq. (NH Bar ID #14543) 

 670 No. Commercial St., Suite 305 

 P.O. Box 808 

 Manchester, NH 03105-0808 

 Phone: (603) 629-4566 

 Fax: (603) 623-8442 

Case 1:08-cv-00395-JL Document 36 Filed 05/28/10 Page 2 of 3
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that I forwarded a copy of the foregoing to Attorney Edward J. Sackman 

and Attorney Andrea K. Johnstone via the District Court’s ECF filing system. 

 /s/ Donna-Marie Cote 

 Donna-Marie Cote 

01148122.DOC

Case 1:08-cv-00395-JL Document 36 Filed 05/28/10 Page 3 of 3