alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 34035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16652]


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

DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management


Notice of Stay of Filing of Plat

[LLCO956000-L14200000 BJ0000]

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Stay of Filing of Plat.

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

SUMMARY: On Wednesday, January 14, 2009, the Bureau of Land Management 
(BLM) published a Filing of Plats of Survey notice in the Federal 
Register (74 FR 2090). This notice provided the public notification 
that the plat was officially filed in the Colorado State Office, 
effective 10 a.m., December 31, 2008. The BLM is publishing this notice 
to inform the public of the setting aside of the plat filing and to 
afford all affected parties a proper period of time to protest this 
action, prior to the plat filing.

DATES: The filing of this plat is set aside until August 28, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Colorado State Office (CO-956), Bureau of Land Management, 
2850 Youngfield Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80215-7093.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Lukacovic, Acting Chief Cadastral 
Surveyor for Colorado, (303) 239-3818.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If a protest of this dependent resurvey is 
received prior to the date of the official filing, the official filing 
will be stayed pending consideration of the merits of the protest. 
Pursuant to the United States Department of the Interior, Office of 
Hearings and Appeals, Interior Board of Land Appeals order dated June 
15, 2009, concerning IBLA 2009-112 and 2009-113, McCollum Family 
Limited Partnership Number One, L.L.L.P. et al., the BLM, Colorado 
State Office's December 31, 2008 (74 FR 2090), the official filing of 
the dependent resurvey of the east boundary and a portion of the 
subdivisional lines in Township 42 North, Range 13 West, New Mexico 
Principal Meridian, Colorado, is set aside.
    This particular plat will not be officially filed until after all 
protests have been accepted or dismissed and become final.

Paul Lukacovic,
Acting, Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Colorado.
[FR Doc. E9-16652 Filed 7-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Hy Hon. Jose L. Linares
v. : Crim. No. 11-353 (JLL)
BAHADIR YAHSTI : ORDER

This matter having come before the Court upon defendant

Bahadir Yahsi’s pretrial motions filed on July 15, 2011 [Docket
Entry 24] and defendant Bahadir Yahsi’s supplemental pretrial
motions filed on October 10, 2011 [Docket Entry 30]

(collectively, “Defendant’s Pretrial Motions”); and the United
States of America (the “Government”) having opposed Defendant’s
Pretrial Motions and also having moved for reciprocal discovery
pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(b) [Docket
Entries 25 and 34]; and the Court having considered the papers
filed by the parties and having heard the arguments of counsel;

and for the reasons expressed by the Court on the record on

November 10, 2011,

IT IS on this LS? day of November, 2011,

ORDERED that defendant’s motion to dismiss the
Superseding Indictment pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules
of Criminal Procedure, as set forth in Point I(a) of defendant's
briefs, be and hereby is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renew at the

close of the Government’s case-in-chief; and it is further


ORDERED that defendant’s motion to dismiss the
Superseding Indictment based on Due Process grounds be and hereby
is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to renew at the close of the
Government’s case-in-chief; and it is further

ORDERED that defendant’s motion for a bill of
particulars pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 7(f)
be and hereby is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that the Government will produce redacted FBI
302 or other reports summarizing all statements of the defendant
made either by telephone or during a meeting with the

confidential informant (“CI”) within thirty days of the entry of

this Order; and it is further
ORDERED that the Government will produce recordings of

any co-conspirator statements within thirty days of the entry of

this Order; and it is further

ORDERED that the Government will disclose any and all
payments made to, or on behalf of, the defendant by the CI within
thirty days of the entry of this Order; and it is further

ORDERED that the Government will provide Rule 404 (b)
material to the defendant no later than fifteen days prior to
trial and defendant shall have leave to seek a continuance should

the volume of information so warrant; and it is further
ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 16(a) (1) (G) of the Federal
Rules of Criminal Procedure, that the Government will provide to

-2-


defendant the name of any witness offering opinion testimony whom
the Government intends to offer during its case-in-chief, as well
as a written summary of that witness’s testimony, including all
opinions, no later than forty-five days prior to trial; and it is
further

ORDERED that per the consent of defense counsel, the
Government’s motion for reciprocal discovery pursuant to Federal

Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(b) be and hereby is GRANTED.

HON. ZQSE"L. LINARES
Uni States District Judge
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

CAMDEN VICINAGE

CITY SELECT AUTO SALES, INC., a New Jersey

corporation, individually and as the representative of a

class of similarly-situated persons,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID RANDALL ASSOCIATES, INC. and

RAYMOND MILEY III,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02658-JBS-KMW

REQUEST BY LOCAL COUNSEL FOR

PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY

TO RECEIVE ELECTRONIC NOTIFICATION

Request is hereby made by local counsel for pro hac vice counsel to receive electronic notification in the

within matter, and it is represented that:

1. An order of the Court granting a motion to appear pro hac vice in the within matter has been

entered and;

2. If admission was granted after March 22, 2005, the Admission Fee, in the amount of $150,

pursuant to L. Civ. R. 101.1 (c) (3), has been paid to the Clerk of the Court.

S/Alan C. Milstein

Signature of Local Counsel

PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY INFORMATION:

Name: Tod A. Lewis

Address: Bock & Hatch, LLC

134 N. La Salle St., Ste. 1000

Chicago, IL 60602

Email: tod@bockhatchllc.com

Instructions for LOCAL COUNSEL for filing:

1. Select the Case Type (Civil) from the menu bar at the top of your screen.

2. Click on Notices.

3. Select the event, Notice of Pro Hac Vice to Receive NEF.

4. Enter the case for which the Request is being filed.

5. Select the PDF document to file.

6. Proofread the docket text.

7. Submit the Request to ECF by clicking the NEXT button.

Case 1:11-cv-02658-JBS-KMW Document 97 Filed 01/09/14 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 3650
#### Zacharias C. PIERRE, Plaintiff, v. BERNUTH, LEMBCKE CO., Inc., Defendant.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Dec. 31, 1956.

*117Paul C. Matthews, New York City, for plaintiff.

Hill, Betts & Nash, New York City, for defendant. Robert S. Blanc, Jr., New York City, of counsel.

FREDERICK van PELT BRYAN, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves, pursuant to Rule 60 (b), Fed.Rules Civ.Proc., 28 U.S.C.A., for an order vacating the order of dismissal for want of prosecution entered herein on May 22, 1953.

This action, for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff on August 7, 1948 due to an alleged assault by a superior officer on board defendant’s vessel, was commenced on November 12, 1948. In early 1951, while this case was pending, plaintiff was committed to a mental institution. Because of this incarceration, plaintiff was unavailable for trial, and on the call of a special pretrial calendar, the order dismissing this action without prejudice was entered.

Plaintiff was discharged from the mental hospital in July 1955. He was then deported to Trinidad. His attorney did not learn of these facts until November 1955 and was not able to locate his client in Trinidad until January 1956. It is not denied that thereafter he attempted to communicate with defendant’s attorneys with respect to the possibility of settlement and was finally informed, shortly before this motion was made, that there would be no settlement negotiations unless and until the case was restored to the calendar.

Under Rule 60(b) (6), this Court may vacate the order dismissing this action for “any * * * reason justifying relief from the operation” of the order, if such motion is made, “within a reasonable time.” This provision is “a grand reservoir of equitable power to do justice in a particular case.” 7 Moore, Federal Practice p. 308 (2d ed. 1950).

Defendant objects to vacating the dismissal at this late date because of the difficulty of defending an action for an injury suffered more than eight years ago.

There is no doubt that trial of the case at this time would impose severe hardship on the defendant. But such hardship to the defendant should not prevent this plaintiff from securing a determination of his cause of action on the merits. Defendant was aware of plaintiff’s mental illness and could have protected itself to a substantial extent at least by con-*118eluding all investigation at that time so that, if plaintiff became able to proceed to trial, defendant would not be unprepared. In fact, defendant did examine plaintiff by deposition in 1949 prior to his commitment to the mental hospital.

This motion is made “within a reasonable time,” even though over three years has elapsed since the dismissal was ordered. It would have been an idle gesture for this motion to have been made on plaintiff’s behalf before he was discharged from the hospital in July 1955. Plaintiff’s attorney seems to have acted with reasonable diligence after he learned of the discharge.

Plaintiff’s motion is granted. The order dismissing this action is vacated and the case is restored to the jury calendar for trial.
**EXHIBIT 32.2****Section 906 Principal Financial Officer Certification**I, Michael J. Beach, Chief Financial Officer of Blackboard Inc. (“the Company”), do herebycertify, under the standards set forth in and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:1. The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 (the“Annual Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and2. The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.Dated: February 23, 2007                                                       /s/ MICHAEL J. BEACH   Michael J. Beach   Chief Financial Officer
Plaintiffs,

ORDER

V.

BASF CATALYSTS, LLC, et at.,

Defendants.

IT APPEARING THAT:

1. The Court believes that, at this juncture in the proceedings, the parties would benefit from

a short stay ofthis matter so that the parties can continue settlement discussions with the Honorable

Joseph A. Dickson, U.S.M.J.

IT IS THEREFORE on this 26th day ofJune, 2018,

ORDERED that this action is hereby STAYED; and it is further

ORDERED that the parties shall appear before Judge Dickson on July 27, 2018 at 9:30

AM for a settlement conference; and it is further

ORDERED that all parties shall appear with representatives with actual settlement

authority; and it is further

ORDERED that any and all insurance carriers shall also be present at the settlement

conference and attend with actual settlement authority; and it is further
adjudication on the merits; and it is further

ORDERED that the parties are to submit a joint status update letter after the settlement

conference has taken place; and it is further

ORDERED that the parties may re-file their respective Appeals should the settlement

conference be unsuccessful.

SO ORDERED.

ChiefJudge, United States District Court
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED November 9, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50319 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus VICENTE GOMEZ-VILLEGAS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-1991

-------------------- Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Vicente GomezVillegas raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

:

HELSINN HEALTHCARE S.A., et al., : CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-3962 (MLC)

:

: 

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

DR. REDDY’S LABORATORIES :

LTD., et al., :

:

Defendants. :

 :

OUTLINE OF SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1

I. Findings of Fact 5

A. Medical treatment for emesis 5

B. The patents-in-suit 9

C. Factual chronology 11

1. Syntex and the genus ‘333 patent 12

2. Roche Syntex further development process 16

3. Helsinn license from Roche 23

4. The Oread agreements 30

5. FDA meeting March 10, 1999 33

6. Phase III protocol 40

7. Commencement of Phase III trials 49

8. The SP agreements 51

9. The MGI agreements 55

10. Status of Phase III clinical trials on January 30, 2002 62

11. Status as of patent application date, January 30, 2003 73

12. Issuance of patents-in-suit 78

13. Claim construction rulings regarding prosecution history 79

14. ANDA filings by Teva and others 81

Case 3:11-cv-03962-MLC-DEA Document 382 Filed 03/03/16 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 22122
II. Conclusions of Law 82

A. On-sale bar 82

1. Legal standards and post-AIA statutory construction 83

a. Historical analysis 83

b. Parties’ arguments regarding on-sale bar 86

c. Interpreting the legal standard 87

1. Statutory construction 87

2. Agency guidelines 89

3. Legislative history 90

4. Public policy considerations 91

d. Application of legal standards 92

1. Statutory construction 92

2. Agency guidelines 95

3. Legislative history 96

4. Public policy considerations 98

2. Findings as to sale or offer to sell pre-AIA 100

a. Applicable legal standards 101

b. Parties’ arguments 104

c. Analysis 106

3. Findings as to sale or offer to sell post-AIA 109

a. Legal standard 109

b. Parties’ arguments 112

c. Analysis 115

4. Findings on ready for patenting 117

a. Legal standards 117

b. Applied legal standards 121

1. Parties’ arguments 122

2. Expert opinions 123

3. Analysis 141

5. Conclusions as to on-sale bar claims 146

B. Written Description 146

1. Legal standards 146

2. Findings and conclusions on written description 147

C. Infringement 150

1. Legal standards 150

2. Findings and conclusions on infringement 154

a. Parties’ arguments 154

Case 3:11-cv-03962-MLC-DEA Document 382 Filed 03/03/16 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 22123
b. Analysis 158

D. Defining the Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art 161

1. Expert testimony 162

2. Analysis 163

CONCLUSION 165

Case 3:11-cv-03962-MLC-DEA Document 382 Filed 03/03/16 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 22124
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 19 - 0134

_________________ ST ATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JESSIE AARON SCHULZ,

Defendant and Appellant. O R D E R

_________________ Pursu ant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for submission on briefs to the Court sitting en banc. The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the Honorable Jason T. Marks , District Judge . For the Court,

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 20 2021

01/20/2021
Case Number: DA 19-0134
Case 2:11-cr-00353-JLL Document 42 Filed 12/16/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 255
Case 2:11-cr-00353-JLL Document 42 Filed 12/16/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 256
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Haley, Millette and Senior Judge Coleman 

DENNIS RAY HARRISON 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 0133-08-3 PER CURIAM 

MAY 13, 2008 

COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA/ 

 DEPARTMENT OF MINES, 

 MINERALS & ENERGY 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (D. Allison Mullins; Lee & Phipps, P.C., on brief), for appellant. 

 (Robert F. McDonnell, Attorney General; Maureen Riley Matsen, 

Deputy Attorney General; Deanis L. Simmons, Senior Assistant 

Attorney General, on brief), for appellee. 

 Dennis Ray Harrison appeals a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Commission 

finding that he failed to prove (1) his psychological condition is either a compensable 

occupational disease or a compensable ordinary disease of life; and (2) he is totally incapacitated 

for all work due to that condition. We have reviewed the record and the commission’s opinion 

and find that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

commission in its final opinion. See Harrison v. Commonwealth of Virginia/Dep’t of Mines, 

Minerals & Energy, VWC File No. 230-97-89 (Dec. 7, 2007). We dispense with oral argument 

and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. See Code 

§ 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 

Affirmed.

 *

 Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
**EXHIBIT 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No.333-116612, Form S-8 No. 333-125777, and Form S-8 No. 333-135995) pertaining to the Amended andRestated 2004 Stock Incentive Plan of Blackboard Inc. of our reports dated February 20, 2007, withrespect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Blackboard Inc., Blackboard Inc.’smanagement’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Blackboard Inc., included in theAnnual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2006.         /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP         McLean, Virginia
0 •11 0 -I 0 -$ 0Case 2:11-cr-00411-WHW Document 13 Filed 07/27/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 20
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 1 of 17 PageID: 1
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 2 of 17 PageID: 2
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 3 of 17 PageID: 3
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 4 of 17 PageID: 4
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 5 of 17 PageID: 5
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 6 of 17 PageID: 6
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 7 of 17 PageID: 7
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 8 of 17 PageID: 8
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 9 of 17 PageID: 9
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 10 of 17 PageID: 10
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 11 of 17 PageID: 11
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 12 of 17 PageID: 12
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 13 of 17 PageID: 13
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 14 of 17 PageID: 14
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 15 of 17 PageID: 15
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 16 of 17 PageID: 16
Case 2:11-cv-00591-SDW-MCA Document 1 Filed 02/01/11 Page 17 of 17 PageID: 17
[Doc. No. 16]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

CAMDEN VICINAGE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

APS CONTRACTING, INC., et al.,

 Defendants.

Civil No. 11-779-KMW

ORDER

THIS MATTER having come before the Court by way of motion 

of Plaintiff Cardinal Contracting Company, LLC (“Plaintiff”), seeking 

final judgment by default against Defendant A.C.C. Construction, 

Limited Liability Company (“ACC”) pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 55(b)(2)

and leave to file an amended pleading pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 15(a); 

and the Court having considered the moving papers; and there being no 

opposition thereto; and for the reasons expressed in the Opinion issued 

this date;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for default 

judgment [Doc. No. 16] against Defendant ACC is GRANTED and judgment 

is entered in favor of Plaintiff against Defendant ACC.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Plaintiff file an affidavit 

supplementing Plaintiff’s submissions regarding damages sought from 

Defendant ACC within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Plaintiff’s motion for leave to 

file an amended pleading [Doc. No. 16] is hereby DENIED. 

Case 1:11-cv-00779-KMW Document 18 Filed 02/11/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 113
s/ Karen M. Williams 

KAREN M. WILLIAMS

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: Hon. Joseph H. Rodriguez

 

Case 1:11-cv-00779-KMW Document 18 Filed 02/11/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 114
Exhibit 32.1
Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                            18 U.S.C., SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002),  I, the  undersigned  President  and Chief
Executive  Officer of Tidelands Oil & Gas Corporation,  (the  "Company"),  herby
certify that to the best of my  knowledge,  the Annual  Report on Form 10-K/A of
the Company for the period ended December 31, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies
with the  requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
of 1934 and that  information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of  operation of the
Company. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the  registrant and will be retained by it and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


Dated: September 14, 2006.                            /s/ Michael Ward
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     President and CEO