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

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, JUDGE

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00391-LTB

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. DANIEL CANTER,

Defendant.

________________________________________________________________________

MINUTE ORDER

________________________________________________________________________

BY ORDER OF JUDGE LEWIS T. BABCOCK

This will confirm that a status/scheduling hearing regarding Defendant Canter is set

Monday, January 30, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom C-401, Byron G. Rogers United

States Courthouse, 1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado. Defendant must be present.

Dated: January 10, 2012

Case 1:11-cr-00391-LTB Document 12 Filed 01/10/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
Exhibit32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Reportof SALOMON SMITH BARNEY FAIRFIELD FUTURES FUND L.P. (the"Partnership") on Form 10-K for the periodending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"),I, Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr., Chief Financial Officer and Director ofCitigroup Managed Futures LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

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

(2) The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Partnership.

/s/Daniel R. McAuliffe,Jr.                            

Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr. Citigroup ManagedFutures LLC Chief Financial Officer and Director

March 15,2005                                                 

Date

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

 

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02708-WYD-KLM 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NANCY D. BERRYMAN; 

THE TEMPLE OF THE UNVEILED GOD; 

THE OFFICE OF THE OVERSEER OF DEDICATION TO ENLIGHTENMENT; and 

HER SUCCESSORS, A CORPORATION SOLE, 

Defendants. 

MINUTE ORDER 

ORDER ENTERED BY SENIOR JUDGE WILEY Y. DANIEL 

The United States’ Motion for Corrected Final Judgment Under Rule 60(a) (ECF 

No. 111) is STRICKEN from the record with leave to refile for failure to comply with 

D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1. 

Dated: March 3, 2015. 

Case 1:11-cv-02708-WYD-KLM Document 112 Filed 03/03/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
Case No. 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 21 filed 10/12/11 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 1
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1612 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 27, 2007 

Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

AN ACT 

To amend the penalty provisions in the International 

Emergency Economic Powers Act, and for other purposes. 

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


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
2 

S 1612 RFH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘International Emer3 gency Economic Powers Enhancement Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF IEEPA. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 206 of the International 

6 Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1705) is 

7 amended to read as follows: 

8 ‘‘SEC. 206. PENALTIES. 

9 ‘‘(a) UNLAWFUL ACTS.—It shall be unlawful for a 

10 person to violate, attempt to violate, conspire to violate, 

11 or cause a violation of any license, order, regulation, or 

12 prohibition issued under this title. 

13 ‘‘(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

14 ‘‘(1) CIVIL PENALTIES.—Section 206(b) of the 

15 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, as 

16 amended by subsection (a), shall apply to violations 

17 described in section 206(a) of such Act with respect 

18 to which enforcement action is pending or com19 menced on or after the date of the enactment of this 

20 Act. 

21 ‘‘(2) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—Section 206(c) of 

22 the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 

23 as amended by subsection (a), shall apply to viola24 tions described in section 206(a) of such Act with 

25 respect to which enforcement action is commenced 

26 on or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
3 

S 1612 RFH

1 ‘‘(c) CRIMINAL PENALTY.—A person who willfully 

2 commits, willfully attempts to commit, or willfully con3 spires to commit, or aids or abets in the commission of, 

4 an unlawful act described in subsection (a) shall, upon 

5 conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a nat6 ural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 

7 years, or both.’’. 

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

9 subsection (a) applies to violations described in section 

10 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act 

11 (50 U.S.C. 1705) with respect to which enforcement ac12 tion is pending or commenced on or after the date of the 

13 enactment of this Act. 

Passed the Senate June 26, 2007. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 


cnoel on PRODPC60 with BILLS
Exhibit 99.02



         I, Steven B. Graham, certify that:

     1.  I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Sbarro, Inc.

     2.  Based on my  knowledge,  this  Quarterly  Report  does not  contain any
untrue  statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary
to make the  statements  made,  in light of the  circumstances  under which such
statements  were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
Quarterly Report;

     3.  Based on my knowledge,  the financial  statements,  and other financial
information  included in this Quarterly  Report,  fairly present in all material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this Quarterly Report;

Date:  November 20, 2002


/s/ Steven B. Graham
------------------------------
Steven B. Graham,
Vice President and Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

 MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL E. HEGARTY

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02343-MSK-MEH Date: November 2, 2012

Courtroom Deputy: Cathy Coomes FTR – Courtroom A501

CHERYL ARABALO, Samantha Halliburton

Samuel Trapp

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, Douglas Nespor

ASHLEY KILROY, Jennifer Jacobson

CAPTAIN GUTIERREZ, and Cathy Havener Greer

PHILLIP DEEDS,

Defendants.

COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER

MOTIONS HEARING 

Court in session: 3:14 p.m.

Court calls case. Appearances of counsel.

Argument and discussion regarding Plaintiff’s Motion to Modify the Scheduling Order (Doc. #90,

filed 10/16/12), Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint (Doc. #91, filed

10/16/12), and Mr. Trapp’s Motion to Withdrawal [sic] (Doc. #95, filed 10/24/12), which was

previously denied by the Court.

ORDERED: 1. Mr. Trapp shall file a renewed motion to withdraw as counsel.

2. Plaintiff’s Motion to Modify the Scheduling Order (Doc. #90, filed

10/16/12) is GRANTED as stated on the record. The following deadlines

are modified: Amended Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures due by November 14,

2012; Discovery due by January 15, 2013; Dispositive Motions due by

March 1, 2013.

3. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint (Doc. #91,

filed 10/16/12) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as stated on the

record. Plaintiff shall file a Third Amended Complaint, after conferring

with counsel for Defendants, on or before November 14, 2012. 

Court in recess: 4:29 p.m. (Hearing concluded)

Total time in court: 1:15

Case 1:11-cv-02343-MSK-MEH Document 103 Filed 11/02/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.1

                               Power of Attorney

  The undersigned directors and/or officers of Ultramar Diamond Shamrock
Corporation hereby constitute and appoint Timothy J. Fretthold, H. Pete Smith,
Curtis V. Anastasio, and Todd Walker, or any of them, their true and lawful
attorneys-in-fact and agents, each with full power of substitution and
resubstitution, to do any and all acts and things in their name and behalf in
their capacity as a director and/or officer of Ultramar Diamond Shamrock
Corporation and to execute any and all instruments for them and in their name
in such capacity, which said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them, may
deem necessary or advisable to enable Ultramar Diamond Shamrock Corporation to
comply with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and any rules,
regulations, and requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission in
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Ultramar Diamond Shamrock
Corporation for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1999, including without
limitation the power to sign for them, in their name in the capacity indicated
above, such Form 10-K and any and all amendments thereto, and to file the same,
with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with
the Securities and Exchange Commission, hereby ratifying and confirming all
that the said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or their substitutes, or any of
them, shall do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

<TABLE>
<S>                                       <C>
        /s/ Jean Gaulin                         /s/ Byron Allumbaugh
____________________________________      ____________________________________
            Jean Gaulin                             Byron Allumbaugh

       /s/ E. Glenn Biggs                    /s/ H. Frederick Christie
____________________________________      ____________________________________
           E. Glenn Biggs                        H. Frederick Christie

       /s/ W. E. Bradford                      /s/ Russell H. Herman
____________________________________      ____________________________________
           W. E. Bradford                          Russell H. Herman

        /s/ W. H. Clark                     /s/ Madeleine Saint-Jacques
____________________________________      ____________________________________
            W. H. Clark                         Madeleine Saint-Jacques

         /s/ Bob Marbut                        /s/ C. Barry Schaefer
____________________________________      ____________________________________
             Bob Marbut                            C. Barry Schaefer

    /s/ Katherine D. Ortega
____________________________________      ____________________________________
        Katherine D. Ortega                          H. Pete Smith
</TABLE>

Dated: February 8, 2000
#### MOORE v. HAMITER et al.

No. 4758.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

March 2, 1934.

Dickson & Denny, of Shreveport, for appellant.

Wilkinson, Lewis & Wilkinson, of Shreveport, for appellee.

*915MILUS, Judge.

The receiver of the Meriwether Supply Company, Inc., brings this suit against the receiver of the Shreveport Paving Company, Inc., and Emmett Coehrap, in solido, for $1,-720.48, the unpaid balance on a note for $5,-000, dated July 10, 1929, made by the paving company and indorsed by Cochran. In the alternative plaintiff asks judgment in the same amount on the open account which it is alleged the note was given to secure.

Defendants answer that plaintiff has received out of concursus proceedings involving transactions between the parties more than the amount of the note and that these sums should have been applied to its payment.

On the trial of the case, in order to arrive at the true situation, the lower court properly allowed the parties considerable latitude under the pleadings. As a result it is conclusively proven that the note was given to secure only the past due indebtedness existing at its date. Also that a past due indebtedness was considered an account showing unpaid items more than thirty days old; that the existence of such items in an account made it all past due.

Applying this test to the account sued on, which is admittedly correct, we find the following sums past due July 10, 1929: Dalzell street account, to the amount of $411.93, less a credit of $11, or $400.93; Texas avenue and Jordan street, $365.88; and Broadmoor boulevard, $346.15; in all, $1,112.96. In the lower court the amount past due was found to be $1,266.90, because the whole of the Dal-zell street account was erroneously held to be past due, instead of only those items dated prior to the date of the note. Judgment was rendered in solido for this amount against both defendants, with 8 per cent, per annum interest from July 10, 1929, and 10 per cent, attorney’s fees.

For the difference, consisting of items not past due when the note was given, judgment was correctly rendered on open account against the receiver of the paving company alone, but erroneously allowed 8 per cent, interest, instead of legal interest, and wrongly assessed 10 per cent, attorney’s fees.

As defendant Emmett Cochran alone has appealed, we cannot correct this error. The position of defendants, that the proceeds of the concursus suits should be credited on the note, is not tenable. Brinson v. Guyon (La. App.) 150 So. 866.

The sums realized on concursus were in payment of particular accounts and to extinguish resulting liens.

The judgment appealed from is therefore amended by reducing the amount allowed against Emmett Cochran, who is liable only as an indorser on the note, from $1,266.90 to $1,112.96, and, as amended, is affirmed; plaintiff to pay the cost of appeal.
212 La. 457

#### TUCKER et al. v. EDWARDS et al.

No. 38598.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 10, 1947.

J. H. Inman, of Baton Rouge, for rela-tors.

Ponder & Ponder, of Amite, C. Paul Phelps, of Ponchatoula, Bolivar E. Kemp, Jr. and Carroll Buck, both of Amite, for appellees.

FOURNET, Justice.

The basic complaint of the relators —that the trial judge failed or refused to sign a judgment in the above entitled matter — presents nothing for our consideration since the issues raised thereby became moot upon the trial judge’s compliance with this court’s order to either sign the judgment or show cause why he should not do so. Counsel for the relators concedes this but contends the court costs advanced by the relators to obtain the relief prayed for should be taxed against the trial judge inasmuch as it was his failure to perform a ministerial duty that compelled them to apply for this writ.

We, know of no rule of law, and counsel for relators has cited none, that would justify the taxing of the costs incident to obtaining this writ against the trial judge because of his actions when the case was- prose'cuted before him. However, the relators having prayed for general and equitable relief, we think, when the entire record is considered, the interest of justice requires that the costs expended in this court be taxed against the party finally cast in the case.

For the reasons assigned, the costs incurred in this court in connection with, securing this writ are to await the final determination of this matter on the merits and they are then to be taxed against the party cast.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, JUDGE 

Civil Case No. 11-cv-02606-LTB

MONTE SPRINGER,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

_______________________________________________________________________

ORDER

_______________________________________________________________________

Upon Defendant’s Response to Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees (Doc 22), and

review of the file in this matter, the finds that Plaintiff has requested attorney fees in the

amount of $5,475.24, pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), 28 U.S.C. §

2412(d). The Commissioner does not object to the motion. Pursuant to Plaintiff’s request,

the Court should order the award of attorney fees to Plaintiff, not his attorney. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees (Doc 20) is GRANTED and

Plaintiff is awarded attorney fees in the amount of $5,475.24.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that after reviewing the Court’s EAJA fee order, the

Commissioner (1) determines that Plaintiff does not owe a debt that is subject to offset

under the Treasury Offset Program; and (2) agrees to waive the requirements of the AntiAssignment Act, then the EAJA fees will be made payable to Plaintiff’s attorney. However,

if there is a debt owed under the Treasury Offset Program, the Commissioner cannot agree

Case 1:11-cv-02606-LTB Document 23 Filed 05/30/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

to waive the requirements of the Anti-Assignment Act, and the remaining EAJA fees after

offset will be paid by a check made out to Plaintiff but delivered to Plaintiff’s attorney.

BY THE COURT:

 s/Lewis T. Babcock 

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, JUDGE

DATED: May 30, 2013

Case 1:11-cv-02606-LTB Document 23 Filed 05/30/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
|Skip to ContentRelease Date: December 11, 2008Release dates | 
Announcements | 
Coded tables |
Historical dataCurrent release | Screen reader | PDF (476 KB) | Data Download Program (DDP)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Z.1 Release                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
|Complete file      PDF (476 KB)


Summary statistics and table of contents      PDF (86 KB) | CSV (9 KB)
Debt growth, borrowing and debt outstanding tables      PDF (12 KB) | CSV (7 KB)
Flows tables      PDF (187 KB) | CSV (128 KB)
Level tables      PDF (146 KB) | CSV (111 KB)
Balance sheet tables      PDF(24 KB) | CSV (13 KB)
Supplementary tables      PDF (36 KB) | CSV (24 KB)These files are available in Acrobat (PDF 3) format only.Obtaining the free Acrobat Reader from the Adobe Web SiteRelease dates | 
Announcements | 
Coded tables |
Historical dataCurrent release | 
 Screen reader | PDF (476 KB) | Data Download Program (DDP)


Statistical releasesHome |
Economic research and dataAccessibility | 
Contact Us
Last update: December 11, 2008
|These files are available in Acrobat (PDF 3) format only.Obtaining the free Acrobat Reader from the Adobe Web Site
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF

J. ROE BUCKLEY / CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

OF MEWBOURNE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350

I, J. Roe Buckley, Chief Financial Officer of Mewbourne Development Corporation,
Managing General Partner of Mewbourne Energy Partners 03-A, L.P. (the Registrant), hereby certify that the accompanying report on Form 10-K, for the annual period ended December 31, 2006 and filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Report) by the Registrant fully complies with the requirements of that section.

I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Registrant.



/s/ J. Roe BuckleyName:

J. Roe BuckleyDate:

March 30, 2007
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 Energy

# AGENCY:

Department of Energy.

# ACTION:

Notice of Proposed Subsequent Arrangement.

# SUMMARY:

This notice is being issued under the authority of Section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2160). The Department is providing notice of a proposed “subsequent arrangement” under the Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the United States and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) and the Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the United States and Canada. 

This subsequent arrangement concerns the retransfer of 1.14 kg of Uranium, containing .225 kg of U-235, in the form of one standard fuel assembly. The material will be sent from McMaster University, Canada to CERCA, France for repair and will be returned to Canada. CERCA is authorized to receive nuclear material pursuant to the U.S.-Euratom Agreement for Cooperation.

In accordance with Section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, we have determined that this subsequent arrangement will not be inimical to the common defense and security.

This subsequent arrangement will take effect no sooner than fifteen days after the date of publication of this notice.

For the Department of Energy.

Richard Goorevich,

Director, Office of International Regimes and Agreements.

[FR Doc. E8-24642 Filed 10-15-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P