or the authority over the long haul to remedy the shortage of information concerning the implementation and effectiveness of the plan envisioned in the judgment. Some of the information that movants seek either is not available or has not been compiled. Nonetheless, a more generous disclosure attitude on the part of the Commission would better serve the Court and the public, and would undoubtedly contribute to the achievement of the goals stated by CPSC as grounds for filing this action in the first place. Although the movants have made an insufficient showing to warrant reopening the settlement or modifying the terms of the Decree as the method for addressing these issues, see Rufo, supra; see also United States v. Swift & Co., 286 U.S. 106, 119, 52 S.Ct. 460, 464, 76 L.Ed. 999 (1932) (<HOLDING>), it does appear that the government may have
holding that the use of the word or in a statute indicates that any of the listed alternative methods will suffice holding that in cases not involving institutional reform only a clear showing of grievous wrong evoked by new and unforeseen conditions will suffice to justify reopening a consent judgment holding that the clear and convincing standard provides appropriate due process in cases involving parental rights holding that failure to move for judgment after verdict entitled party only to a new trial not a judgment in its favor holding that a good cause showing  will not suffice to fulfill the compelling reasons standard that a party must meet to rebut the presumption of access to dispositive pleadings and attachments