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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

CAMELBAK PRODUCTS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE PARTNERSHIPS AND UNINCORPORATED 

ASSOCIATIONS IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE “A”,

Defendants.

Civil Action No.: 1:20-cv-03952

Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer

Magistrate Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert

NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff hereby files this Notice of Voluntary 

Dismissal, without prejudice, as to the following Defendant(s) identified on Schedule A of the 

Complaint:

NO. DEFENDANT

245 ledu168

538 sea-blooms

69 Shenzhen Focalvalue Technology Co., Ltd.

523 mix21kg

89 VEQSKING Outdoors_Fans Store

443 VEQKING Joy Store

445 WANAYOU Official Store

399 Outdoors Expectation Store

342 Buying

49 Outdoor Series Store

48 Outdoor Adventure Store 

71 Enjoyable Outdoor Store

73 GO Outdoors Store

Case: 1:20-cv-03952 Document #: 33 Filed: 09/07/20 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:9361
46 Cycling fun Store

72 For Your Fun Outdoor Store

74 Have Fun everyday Store

75 Loving Outdoor Life Store

70 24H Outdoor Online Store

76 Outdoor Club Store

47 Outdoor & Musical Store

282 youngshop

417 Shenzhen Makeway Trading Co., Ltd.

30 AllenFAM

31 Happy Factory 1

38 Wood Handmade Cross Embroidery

242 keenwalker

DATED: September 8, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Keith A. Vogt

Keith A. Vogt (Bar No. 6207971)

Keith Vogt, Ltd.

111 West Jackson Boulevard, Suite 1700

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Telephone: 312-675-6079

E-mail: keith@vogtip.com

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

Case: 1:20-cv-03952 Document #: 33 Filed: 09/07/20 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:9362
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 

document was electronically filed on September 8, 2020 with the Clerk of the Court using the 

CM/ECF system, which will automatically send an email notification of such filing to all registered 

attorneys of record.

/s/ Keith A. Vogt

Keith A. Vogt

Case: 1:20-cv-03952 Document #: 33 Filed: 09/07/20 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:9363
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3804 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3804

     To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
    Assistance Act to make beach nourishment projects eligible for 
  inclusion in mitigation plans and for hazard mitigation assistance.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 11, 2004

 Mr. Brown of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
    Assistance Act to make beach nourishment projects eligible for 
  inclusion in mitigation plans and for hazard mitigation assistance.

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

SECTION 1. MITIGATION PLANNING.

    Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5165) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(f) Eligibility of Beach Nourishment Projects.--Beach nourishment 
projects that meet such standards as the Secretary of the Army may 
establish shall be eligible for inclusion in a mitigation plan as an 
action to mitigate hazards, risks, and vulnerabilities identified under 
a mitigation plan developed under this section.''.

SEC. 2. HAZARD MITIGATION.

    Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 
Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170c) is amended by adding at the end the 
following:
    ``(d) Eligibility of Beach Nourishment Projects.--Beach nourishment 
projects that meet such standards as the Secretary of the Army may 
establish shall be treated for purposes of this section as hazard 
mitigation measures which are cost effective and substantially reduce 
the risk of future damage, hardship, loss or suffering in an area 
affected by a major disaster and shall be eligible for assistance under 
this section.''.
                                 <all>
```
IV

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 554

To condemn North Korea’s missile launch over Japan.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 24, 1998

Mr. UNDERWOOD (for himself and Mr. YOUNG of Alaska) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International

Relations

RESOLUTION

To condemn North Korea’s missile launch over Japan.

Whereas on August 31, 1998, the Government of North

Korea launched a 3-stage ballistic missile in and over the

territorial airspace and waters of Japan;

Whereas North Korea launched this missile for the purpose

of launching a satellite into orbit in a reckless manner

over inhabited lands of Japan, a sovereign and independent nation, without warning, provocation, or permission;

Whereas the missile that was fired is a modified version of

the Taepodong I, which has an estimated range of up to

6,000 kilometers;

Whereas the Taepodong I missile is a medium range ballistic

missile capable of delivering a nuclear, chemical, or biological weapon of mass destruction;
2

•HRES 554 IH

Whereas North Korea has ignored international attempts to

curb the proliferation of ballistic missile technology and

as a result has been earning an estimated

$1,000,000,000 annually from illicit missile sales to other

rogue nations such as Iran, Syria, and Libya;

Whereas the success of any subsequent tests of the

Taepodong I will further advance the development of

North Korea’s long range ballistic missile program, the

Taepodong II, with a range of approximately 4,000 to

6,000 kilometers, thus placing Guam and Alaska at risk

of an attack;

Whereas recent defectors from North Korea have indicated

that North Korea’s Taepodong and Nodong missile programs are in the final stages of development;

Whereas United States intelligence assets have indicated that

a large new underground complex is being built near

Pyongyang, contrary to the spirit of the 1994 Agreed

Framework that halted development of North Korea’s

nuclear weapons program;

Whereas the North Korean Government is willing to conduct

its foreign policy in a game of brinkmanship in order to

boost morale and improve its bargaining leverage in

international negotiations; and

Whereas the Taepodong I missile directly places all 37,000

United States troops in South Korea and 44,000 United

States troops in Japan at risk: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

2 (1) condemns North Korea’s Government and

3 military for the missile launch over Japan of August

4 31, 1998;
3

•HRES 554 IH

1 (2) calls on the Government of North Korea to

2 cease all production of weapons of mass destruction

3 and cease proliferation of ballistic missiles to other

4 nations; and

5 (3) calls on the Government of North Korea to

6 abide by the 1994 Agreed Framework entered into

7 by North Korea, the United States, Japan, and

8 South Korea.

Æ
##### 



Exhibit 31.1 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Charles E. Ramey, certify that:  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of US Dataworks, 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;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is
being prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about
the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end
of the period covered by this quarterly report based on such evaluation; c) disclosed in this quarterly report any change in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting. Date: November 15, 2004 /s/ Charles E. RameyCharles E. Ramey,Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                        5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Consolidated
Financial Statements for the quarter ended 3/31/00 for DigiTEC 2000, Inc. and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                            1,149,155
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1,802,382
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                         139,076
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  3,140,316
<PP&E>                                                    0
<DEPRECIATION>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    3,546,935
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            17,958,663
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                              61
<COMMON>                                              7,059
<OTHER-SE>                                                0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      3,546,935
<SALES>                                           9,533,198
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  9,533,198
<CGS>                                             8,219,929
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    388,033
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (3,449,420)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (3,449,420)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (3,449,420)
<EPS-BASIC>                                            (.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          (.49)



</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Catalin Livio BUCULEI, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 04-7261.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 16, 2004.

Decided Dec. 22, 2004.

Catalin Livio Buculei, Appellant pro se. Thomas Michael DiBiagio, United States Attorney, Barbara Slaymaker Sale, Assistant United States Attorney, Andrew Clayton White, Lynne Ann Battaglia, Office of the United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Catalin Livio Buculei seeks to appeal from the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The order is not appeal-able 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 his or her constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude *274that Buculei 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*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                              35
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      26760
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 26795
<PP&E>                                            7885
<DEPRECIATION>                                    6373
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   28426
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1028
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          5740
<OTHER-SE>                                       21658
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     28426
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1210
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  26
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1236)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1236)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1236)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1
         CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
         ---------------------------------------------------------------

     I, Evon Au hereby certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Thai One On,
Inc. and its wholly-owned Subsidiary, Thai Pasta Enterprise Sdn. Bhd.

2. Based on my knowledge, the annual 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 the annual report.

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in the annual report, fairly present in all
material respects our financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows as of, and for, the periods presented in the annual report.

4. The other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) and we have:

a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
    material information relating to Thai One On, Inc., including
    its subsidiaries, if any, is made known to us by others within
    those entities, particularly during the period in which this
    annual report is being prepared;

b)  evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and
    procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the
    filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c)  presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
    effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on
    our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.  The other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to our auditors and the audit committee of our
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)  that there were no significant deficiencies in the design or
    operation of internal controls which could adversely affect our
    ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data
    and have further advised our auditors that there we are not aware
    of any material weaknesses in our internal controls; and

b)  that there was no fraud, whether or not material, that involved
    our management or other employees who have a significant role in
    our internal controls; and

6.  The other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual
that there were no significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation.

                                   THAI ONE ON, INC., Registrant

Dated: March 20, 2005.
                                   -------------------------------------
                                   By: Evon Au, Chief Executive Officer,
                                   President and Chairman of the Board
H. Res. 538

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

September 16, 1998.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 4550) to provide for programs to facilitate a

significant reduction in the incidence and prevalence of substance abuse through reducing the demand for illegal drugs

and the inappropriate use of legal drugs. The first reading

of the bill shall be dispensed with. General debate shall be

confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by Representative Hastert of Illinois or

a designee and a Member opposed to the bill. After general

debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the

five-minute rule for a period not to exceed three hours. Before consideration of any other amendment it shall be in

order to consider the amendment printed in the report of the

Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, if offered

by a Member designated in the report. That amendment shall
2

•HRES 538 EH

be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment,

and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. After

disposition of that amendment, the provisions of the bill as

then perfected shall be considered as original text for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute rule. During consideration of the bill for further amendment, the

Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority

in recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering

an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of

the Congressional Record designated for that purpose in

clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as read. The Chairman of the Committee of the

Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows another electronic vote without

intervening business, provided that the minimum time for

electronic voting on the first in any series of questions shall

be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill

for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill

to the House with such amendments as may have been adopt-
3

•HRES 538 EH

ed. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on

the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.