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

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Honorable R. Brooke Jackson

Civil Action No. 11-CV-02637-RBJ

NIKI DANE AND MATTHEW DANE,

Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

Defendant.

ORDER SETTING TRIAL AND FINAL PRETRIAL/TRIAL PREPARATION CONFERENCE

This matter has been scheduled for a five-day bench trial on the docket of Judge R. 

Brooke Jackson in the U.S. District Courthouse, Courtroom A902, 9th Floor, 901 19th Street, 

Denver, Colorado, to commence on November 26, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. 

A Final Pretrial/Trial Preparation Conference is set for November 9, 2012 at 1:30 p.m.

Counsel who will try the case shall attend in person. 

During the Final Pretrial/Trial Preparation Conference the parties should be prepared to 

address: witnesses and evidence, anticipated evidentiary issues, stipulations as to fact, and any 

other issue affecting the duration or course of the trial.

For additional information, please review my practice standards located at 

www.cod.uscourts.gov/Judges/Judges.aspx.

DATED this 30th day of January, 2012.

BY THE COURT: 

___________________________________

R. Brooke Jackson

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02637-RBJ Document 12 Filed 01/30/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6028

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

PAUL VERNON MCLEAN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Cameron McGowan Currie, District

Judge. (0:04-cr-00322-CMC-1; 0:07-cv-70086-CMC)

Submitted: May 22, 2008 Decided: May 28, 2008

Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Paul Vernon McLean, Appellant Pro Se. Stanley D. Ragsdale, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Paul Vernon McLean seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that McLean has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
EXHIBIT 32-1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO




18 U.S.C. ss.1350,




AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Annual Report of Cosi, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Carin L. Stutz, Chief Executive Officer and President and Director of the Company and I, William Koziel, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 Act of 1934; 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: March 15, 2013
/s/ CARIN L. STUTZCarin L. Stutz

Chief Executive Officer and President

and Director






Date: March 15, 2013
/s/ WILLIAM KOZIELWilliam Koziel

Chief Financial Officer,

Secretary and Treasurer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Cosi, Inc. and will be retained by Cosi, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.




The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 6, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**F.111 Foreign Banking Offices in U.S.1** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 14, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60681-60682]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24224]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN: 0648-XL17


Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Salmon 
Advisory Subpanel (SAS) will hold a work session by telephone 
conference, which is open to the public, to develop recommendations for 
the November 2008 Council meeting.

DATES: The telephone conference will be held Thursday, October 30, from 
9 a.m. to 11 a.m.

ADDRESSES: A listening station will be available at the Pacific Fishery 
Management Council, Small Conference Room, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, 
Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384; telephone: (503) 820-2280.
    Council address: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE 
Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Chuck Tracy, Salmon Management 
Staff Officer, Pacific Fishery Management Council: (503) 820-2280.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the work session is to review 
information in the Council's November meeting briefing book related to 
salmon management, and to develop comments and recommendations for 
consideration at the November Council meeting.
    Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda 
may come before the SAS for discussion, those issues may not be the 
subject of formal SAS action during this meeting. SAS action will be 
restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any 
issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency 
action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified 
of the SAS's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Ms. Carolyn Porter at (503) 820-2280 at least 5 
days prior to the meeting date.


[[Page 60682]]


    Dated: October 7, 2008.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E8-24224 Filed 10-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
1 This minute order is issued pursuant to the express authority of the Honorable Robert E. 

Blackburn, United States District Judge for the District of Colorado. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00422-REB-04

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

4. RICHARD CROSSE,

Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER1

A Notice of Disposition has been filed with the court for defendant Crosse. On

July 12, 2012, commencing at 11:00 a.m., the court shall conduct a telephonic setting

conference to set the change of plea hearing for this defendant. Counsel for the

government shall arrange, initiate, and coordinate the conference call necessary to

facilitate the setting conference. 

Dated: July 10, 2012
EXHIBIT
23.3

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-121427) pertaining to the
Primus Guaranty, Ltd. 2002 Stock Incentive Plan, 2004 Stock Incentive
Plan and Written Compensation Agreements with Certain Employees of
Primus Guaranty, Ltd. of our reports dated March 3, 2006, with respect
to the consolidated financial statements of Primus Guaranty Ltd. and
Primus Guaranty Ltd. management's assessment of the effectiveness
of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting of Primus Guaranty Ltd.,
included in this Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

New
York, New York March 3, 2006

---
#### KOLLSMAN v. COE, Commissioner of Patents.

No. 6784.

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Decided Sept. 13, 1937.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 29, 1937.

Leonard Day, of New York City, for appellant.

R. F. Whitehead, Solicitor, U. S. Patent Office, and Wm. Wallace Cochran, both of Washington, D. C., for appellee.

Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, and ROBB, VAN ORSDEL, GRONER, and STEPHENS, Associate Justices.

STEPHENS, Associate Justice.

This is a suit brought under section 4915 of the Revised Statutes, as amended (35 U.S.C. § 63 [35 U.S.C.A. § 63]). It was based upon a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, which rejected Claims 1 to 7 of the appellant’s application for patent. The District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia decreed that the appellant was entitled to a patent on his application, Serial No. 705,642 filed January 8, 1934, entitled “Quick Reading Indicator,” the patent to include Claim 7, but not to include Claims 1 to 6, both inclusive.

No appeal was taken from that part of the decree which allowed Claim 7. The appellant abandoned Claims 3 and 4, and the appeal involves only Claims 1, 2, 5 and 6.

We have carefully considered the record and briefs. For the reasons set forth by the tribunals of the Patent Office, which we deem it unnecessary to repeat, we are convinced that the appealed claims, read in the light of the specification, show nothing that involved invention.

Decree affirmed.

VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice, sat during the argument of this case, but died before the opinion was prepared.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           2,583
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,240
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,447
<PP&E>                                         270,414
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (54,170)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 238,397
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,927
<BONDS>                                        319,857
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     45,612
<COMMON>                                           187
<OTHER-SE>                                    (146,834)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   238,397
<SALES>                                         52,967
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                55,624
<CGS>                                           35,887
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   35,887
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              37,988
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (17,309)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (17,309)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (17,309)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.51)


</TABLE>
*

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination

of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This case is

therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not

binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and

collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent

with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

July 15, 2008

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 07-4274

v. District of Utah

JUAN CARLOS SEGOVIAAGUILAR,

Defendant-Appellant.

(D.C. No. 2:07-CR-102-TS-1)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before TACHA, KELLY and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

Defendant-Appellant Juan Carlos Segovia-Aguilar pleaded guilty to

possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, possession of a firearm

by a convicted felon, and aggravated reentry of a deported alien. The advisory

Sentencing Guidelines range was calculated at 78–97 months; Mr. Segovia-
-2-

Aguilar requested a below-Guidelines sentence of 60 months, which was the

statutory minimum for one of the counts. He was sentenced to 78 months, to be

followed by 48 months of supervised release. He now challenges that sentence

for substantive unreasonableness.

Mr. Segovia-Aguilar concedes that the Guidelines range was correctly

calculated and that the district court addressed, on the record, all of the

sentencing factors raised by the defendant’s Sentencing Memorandum. He

contends, however, that the 78-month sentence is substantively unreasonable, in

light of his youth, lack of education, and financial support of his family in

Mexico, and the “poignant” fact that he will be deported following his prison

term. 

A correctly calculated, procedurally reasonable, within-Guidelines sentence

is entitled on appeal to a presumption of reasonableness. United States v. AngelGuzman, 506 F.3d 1007 (10th Cir. 2007). While not a rubber stamp, appellate

review of sentencing decisions is deferential. Mr. Segovia-Aguilar made

essentially the same arguments in mitigation of his sentence to the district court

that he makes on appeal, the district court accorded those arguments due

consideration, and the court rendered a sentence at the bottom of the

recommended range. It did not abuse its discretion.
-3-

The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Utah 

is therefore AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Michael W. McConnell

Circuit Judge
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02765-WJM-MJW

DALIP BASANTI, 

Plaintiff,

v.

JEFFREY METCALF, M.D., JASON ROZESKI, M.D. AND PLATTE VALLEY MEDICAL

CENTER,

Defendants.

ORDER OF RECUSAL

Michael J. Watanabe, Magistrate Judge

This case is before the Court pursuant to an Order of Reference from District

Judge William J. Martinez dated October 26, 2011. In reviewing this case, this Court

finds that one of the named defendants, Jason Rozeski, M.D., is now being represented

by Kevin Kuhn, Esquire, from the law firm of Wheeler Trigg O’Donnell, LLP. Mr. Kuhn

entered his appearance in this case on December 14, 2011. See docket no. 14.

Magistrate Judge Michael J. Watanabe discloses that he and Mr. Kuhn were

previously employed as an attorneys for the law firm of Montgomery Little Young

Campbell & McGrew, P.C., n/k/a Montgomery Little & Soren, P.C., and worked very

closely on a number of cases with each other. Moreover, Magistrate Judge Watanabe

does frequently socialize with Kevin Kuhn. The Court further notes that at the time this

Court entered its Minute Order Setting Scheduling/Planning Conference, Mr. Kuhn had

not entered his appearance on behalf of defendant, Jason Rozeski, M.D.

Case 1:11-cv-02765-WJM-BNB Document 17 Filed 12/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §455 the undersigned recuses himself for

services in the above-captioned matter since this Court’s impartiality might reasonably

be questioned. The Rule 16 Scheduling Conference set on January 27, 2012, at 9:00

a.m. before Magistrate Judge Watanabe is VACATED. This Court directs that this case

be returned to the Clerk of Court for reassignment by random draw for a new Magistrate

Judge.

Dated this 15th day of December 2011 in Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT

S/Michael J. Watanabe

Michael J. Watanabe

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02765-WJM-BNB Document 17 Filed 12/15/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02680-RBJ-KLM

JOHN DOE,

Plaintiff,

v.

MERCK & CO., INC., and

MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP.,

Defendants.

_____________________________________________________________________

MINUTE ORDER

_____________________________________________________________________

ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Submit Supplemental

Authority [Docket No. 17; Filed on February 3, 2012] (the “Motion”). 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. The Court accepts for

consideration the supplemental authority provided by Defendants at Docket No. 17-1 for

the Court’s adjudication of Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed Anonymously [Docket No. 2].

Dated: February 9, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02680-RBJ-KLM Document 19 Filed 02/09/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
#### BLANTON, U. S. Atty., v. NOELL.

No. 10981.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Nov. 21, 1937.

*8Harry C. Blanton, U. S. Atty., of Sikeston, Mo., for appellant.

Patrick H. Cullen, of St. Louis, Mo. (Clem F. Storckman and Cullen Coil, both of St Louis, Mo., on the brief), for appellee.

Before STONE, GARDNER, SAN-BORN, WOODROUGH, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM. .

This appeal presents the same question that this court has ruled upon in Re Noell, 93 F.2d 5, opinion filed today, and was argued and submitted with that proceeding-

The appellant petitioned the court below for an order requiring the appellee to show cause why his name should not be stricken from the roll of attorneys authorized to practice law before that court, on the sole ground that he had been suspended from practice in the state courts of Missouri for a period of two years by the St. Louis Court of Appeals. The order to show cause was issued, and the appellee made his return, contending in the lower court, as he has contended here, that the procedure followed by the state court, which resulted in his suspension, did not accord with due process, in that he was denied an opportunity to be heard, and that therefore the order of suspension constituted no adequate basis for an order striking his name from the roll of attorneys authorized to practice in the court below. That court so held, arid, from an order dismissing the proceeding, this appeal was taken.

The order of suspension entered by the state court is the identical order referred to in our opinion in Re Noell. For the reasons already stated in that opinion, the order appealed from is affirmed, without prejudice, however, to any other or further proceedings in the court below looking to the disbarment or suspension of the appellee as an attorney of that court for the same reasons for which he was suspended by the state court, or for any other reasons. It is so ordered.
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Raleigh WARD, Petitioner, v. S. T. DOWLING, as Clerk of the Circuit Court of Union County, Florida, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. Term, 1936.

H. O. Brown, of Lake Butler, for the motion.

PER CURIAM.

Cause dismissed on motion of counsel for relator.
---

|Coded Tables | 
|------------ | 



|These data are released whenever there are code changes.                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Complete file (343 KB PDF)Cover page and table of contents (15 KB PDF)
Debt growth, borrowing and debt outstanding tables (13 KB PDF)
Flows tables (141 KB PDF)
Level tables (117 KB PDF)
Balance sheet tables (18 KB PDF)
Supplementary tables (38 KB PDF)

|These files are available in Acrobat (PDF 3) format only.Obtaining the free Acrobat Reader from the Adobe Web Site
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Release dates |
Coded tables | Historical dataCurrent release | 
Screen reader | 
PDF (450 KB)

Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: September 21, 2005