alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 1:11-cv-02669-REB-KLM Document 27 Filed 03/02/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 7
Case 1:11-cv-02669-REB-KLM Document 27 Filed 03/02/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 7
Case 1:11-cv-02669-REB-KLM Document 27 Filed 03/02/12 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 7
Case 1:11-cv-02669-REB-KLM Document 27 Filed 03/02/12 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 7
Case 1:11-cv-02669-REB-KLM Document 27 Filed 03/02/12 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 7
Case 1:11-cv-02669-REB-KLM Document 27 Filed 03/02/12 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 7
Case 1:11-cv-02669-REB-KLM Document 27 Filed 03/02/12 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 7
#### WILSON TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, Appellant, v. Charles M. HANSEN, as Father and Natural Guardian of Raymond Homer Hansen, a Minor.

No. 10878.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Oct. 26, 1937.

Morris Evans, of Minneapolis, Minn., M. Tedd Evans, of Pipestone, Minn., and E. Raymond Hughes, of Mankato, Minn., for appellant.

Glenn Catlin, of Pipestone, Minn., and James H. Hall, of Marshall, Minn., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

'Appeal dismissed, with costs.
---

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



|These data are released whenever there are code changes.                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Complete file (409 KB PDF)Cover page and table of contents (78 KB PDF)
Debt growth, borrowing and debt outstanding tables (13 KB PDF)
Flows tables (143 KB PDF)
Level tables (119 KB PDF)
Balance sheet tables (19 KB PDF)
Supplementary tables (29 KB PDF)

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

Release dates | 
Announcements | 
Coded tables | Historical dataCurrent release | 
Screen reader | 
PDF (632 KB) | 
Data Download Program (DDP)

Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: December 6, 2007
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1767 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide an exception 

to the 60-day limit on Medicare reciprocal billing arrangements between 

two physicians during the period in which one of the physicians is 

ordered to active duty as a member of a reserve component of the 

Armed Forces. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 11, 2007 

Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. LOTT, and Mrs. FEINSTEIN) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 

an exception to the 60-day limit on Medicare reciprocal 

billing arrangements between two physicians during the 

period in which one of the physicians is ordered to active 

duty as a member of a reserve component of the Armed 

Forces. 

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


ccoleman on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•S 1767 IS

1 SECTION 1. EXCEPTION TO 60-DAY LIMIT ON MEDICARE RE2 CIPROCAL BILLING ARRANGEMENTS IN CASE 

3 OF PHYSICIANS ORDERED TO ACTIVE DUTY 

4 IN THE ARMED FORCES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1842(b)(6)(D)(iii) of the 

6 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395u(b)(6)(D)(iii)) is 

7 amended by inserting after ‘‘of more than 60 days’’ the 

8 following: ‘‘or are provided (before January 1, 2008) over 

9 a longer continuous period during all of which the first 

10 physician has been called or ordered to active duty as a 

11 member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces’’. 

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

13 subsection (a) shall apply to services furnished on or after 

14 the date of the enactment of this section. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
Case 1:11-cr-00398-WJM Document 29 Filed 05/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 8
Case 1:11-cr-00398-WJM Document 29 Filed 05/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 8
Case 1:11-cr-00398-WJM Document 29 Filed 05/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 8
Case 1:11-cr-00398-WJM Document 29 Filed 05/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 8
Case 1:11-cr-00398-WJM Document 29 Filed 05/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 8
Case 1:11-cr-00398-WJM Document 29 Filed 05/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 8
Case 1:11-cr-00398-WJM Document 29 Filed 05/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 8
Case 1:11-cr-00398-WJM Document 29 Filed 05/04/12 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 8
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, October 23, 2008, 8 a.m. to October 24, 2008,  5 p.m., Holiday Inn Express Hotel and Suites, San Francisco Fisherman's  Wharf, 550 North Point Street, San Francisco, CA, 91433 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on September 19, 2008, 73 FR 54408-54411.                 

The meeting will be held October 22, 2008, 6 p.m. to October 23, 2008, 8 p.m. The meeting location remains the same. The meeting is closed to the public. 

Dated: September 30, 2008. 

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

 [FR Doc. E8-23594 Filed 10-6-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Income and the Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Financial Position and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000766916
<NAME> AMOCO COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             140
<SECURITIES>                                       579
<RECEIVABLES>                                     5444
<ALLOWANCES>                                        15
<INVENTORY>                                        960
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  7992
<PP&E>                                           45626
<DEPRECIATION>                                   24979
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   31743
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             4853
<BONDS>                                           2936
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       13984
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     31743
<SALES>                                          21332
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 24199
<CGS>                                            15540
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    15540
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  4514
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 172
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   2327
<INCOME-TAX>                                       757
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1570
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1570
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Erie County Board of Social Welfare, Petitioner, against Linus Schneider, Respondent.

Children's Court, Erie County,

June 12, 1957.

*375
      *.Elmer R. Weil, County Attorney (Peter*J, *Mancuso*of counsel), for petitioner.

*Raymond W. Young*and *Leonard N. Lalcser*for respondent.

Victor B. Wylegala, J.

This is a proceeding brought by the Department of Social Welfare to enforce support by the respondent of his minor stepdaughter, Mary Louise, who is receiving an aid-to-dependent-children grant from that department. The natural mother of the child in question died June 28, 1954. The stepfather continued to support Mary Louise as well as other minor stepchildren until an older brother took her from the home of the stepfather and refused to permit any contact between Mary Louise and her stepfather. The stepfather insists that he is willing to resume support on condition Mary Louise returns to his household, which she is not willing to do.

The objections to the insufficiency of the pleadings need not be passed upon, because it will be assumed that correction could be readily made by amendment or proceeding *de novo.*

The Children’s Court has jurisdiction in matters relating to support of stepchildren only under sections 30, 30-a (subd. 5) and 31 (subd. 5) of the Children’s Court Act. *(People ex rel. Deming*v. *Williams,*161 Misc. 573.)

There are various provisions in other statutes relating to support of stepchildren, which need not be discussed here, except to recall that statutory provisions in derogation of common-law obligations must be strictly construed. There would be no question as to respondent’s obligation to support as long as his wife, the mother of the stepchild, lived.

The respondent seriously contends that death of the mother terminated his relationship and obligations to stepchildren. Unfortunately there is nothing in the statutes, and very little by way of decisions in the courts, to guide us in determining the duration of the stepparent obligation. It is significant that the statutes impose upon children the duty of supporting their parents and grandparents, but do not do so in cases *376of stepchildren. Neither stepchildren nor stepparents inherit property from each other.

After careful examination of decisions, including the most recent in the Domestic Relations Court of New York City by our esteemed colleagues Justice Panken *(Peake*v. *Peake,*205 Misc. 393) and Justice Ruisi *(Matter of Jones*v. *Stautz,*5 Misc 2d 185), we are of the opinion that in the absence of a clear statutory provision continuing the obligation of the stepparent after the death of either party to the marriage the relationship and obligation on the part of the survivor terminates.

This proceeding, therefore, is dismissed, without costs.

Enter order accordingly.
**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 withthe Quarterly Report of North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, H. R. Brown,President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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 results of operations of the Company. 

Date: May 10, 2007 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to NorthPittsburgh Systems, Inc. and will be retained by North Pittsburgh Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SHANE D. WILLIS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

CITY OF SALEM, OREGON; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 11-35314

D.C. No. 3:08-cv-01510-HA

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Oregon

Ancer L. Haggerty, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 15, 2012** 

Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Oregon state prisoner Shane D. Willis appeals pro se from the district court’s

judgment dismissing as time-barred his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint alleging

constitutional violations arising from a traffic stop. We have jurisdiction under 28

FILED

MAY 25 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-35314

U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th

Cir. 2009), and we affirm. 

The district court properly dismissed Willis’s action as time-barred. See Or.

Rev. Stat. § 12.110(1) (two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims);

Douglas, 567 F.3d at 1109 (for § 1983 claims, courts apply the forum state’s

statute of limitations for personal injury claims); see also Wallace v. Kato, 549

U.S. 384, 391 (2007) (“The cause of action accrues even though the full extent of

the injury is not then known or predictable.” (citation and internal quotation marks

omitted)).

Willis’s remaining contentions, including those contained in his letter

received on August 29, 2011, are unpersuasive.

AFFIRMED.
#### **Exhibit 32.2**

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code), theundersigned officer of Golden Cycle Gold Corporation, (the “Company”) doeshereby certify with respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-Kfor the period ended December 31, 2006 (the “Report”) that:

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

 

Date: March 27, 2007
|   | /s/ R. Herbert Hampton      |
|--------|-----------------------------|
|   | R. Herbert Hampton          |
|   | Principal financial officer |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solelypursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 ofChapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed aspart of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
#### ESTATE of GLECO.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02343-MSK-MEH

CHERYL ARABALO,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF DENVER, COUNTY OF DENVER, through its elected officials, the Denver City

Council,

ASHLEY KILROY, in his official capacity as Acting Safety Manager for the City and County of

Denver, and

CAPTAIN GUTIERREZ,

Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER

Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on February 16, 2012.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend Pleadings [filed February 13, 2012; docket #36] is

denied without prejudice for failure to comply with D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.1A. The Court reminds

the parties that it “will not consider any motion, other than a motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 or 56,

unless counsel for the moving party or a pro se party, before filing the motion, has conferred or

made reasonable, good-faith efforts to confer with opposing counsel. ” D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.1A

(emphasis added). It is the responsibility of the moving party to “state in the motion, or in a

certificate attached to the motion, the specific efforts to comply with this rule.” Id. Because the

Court has not granted leave to amend and the time for amendment as a matter of course has passed,

the Amended Complaint [docket #37] is improperly filed and therefore stricken. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 15(a)(1). 

 

 

Case 1:11-cv-02343-MSK-MEH Document 39 Filed 02/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
389 A.2d 691

#### Brewer et al., Appellants, v. Filler et al.

Argued March 13, 1978.

Kenneth C. Myers, with him Richard M. Serbin, for appellants;

Bernadette Barattini, with her Richard H. Wix, for appellees.

Order affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

IN THE INTEREST OF: A.R., A MINOR

APPEAL OF: A.R., A MINOR :

:

:

:

: No. 288 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

IN THE INTEREST OF: A.V., A MINOR

APPEAL OF: A.V., A MINOR :

:

:

:

: No. 289 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 13th day of February, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### International Trade Administration 

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

*Docket Number:*                     08-047.                     *Applicant:*                     Stanford University, Stanford, CA 943005-5126.                     *Instrument:*                     Electron Microscope, Model Tecnai G2 F20 TWIN.                     *Manufacturer:*                     FEI Company, the Netherlands.                     *Intended Use:*                     See notice at 73 FR 54560, September 22, 2008.                 

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

Dated: October 6, 2008. 

Faye Robinson, 

Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff,   Import Administration.

 [FR Doc. E8-24202 Filed 10-9-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
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

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

# AGENCY:

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

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America Corporation, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, Inspectorate America Corporation, 6175 Hwy 347, Beaumont, TX 77705, 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, inquiries 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                         *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov*. 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 Inspectorate America Corporation, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on May 16, 2007. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for May 2010. 

# 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. 

Dated: January 31, 2008. 

Ira S. Reese, 

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services.

 [FR Doc. E8-2437 Filed 2-11-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P