alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DANIEL G. SZMANIA, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

E-LOAN, INC.; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-36055 

D.C. No. 3:16-cv-05644-RBL 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 13, 2018

**

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. 

Daniel G. Szmania appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment 

dismissing his diversity action arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir. 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

FEB 23 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 16-36055 

2005). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Szmania’s claim that defendants lacked 

authority to foreclose as barred by the doctrine of res judicata because this claim

was raised or could have been raised in a previous action between the parties or 

their privies that resulted in a final judgment on the merits. See Holcombe v. 

Hosmer, 477 F.3d 1094, 1097 (9th Cir. 2007) (federal courts apply state law 

regarding the res judicata effect of state court judgments); Williams v. Leone & 

Keeble, Inc., 254 P.3d 818, 821 (Wash. 2011) (en banc) (setting forth elements of 

the doctrine of res judicata under Washington law); Southcenter Joint Venture v. 

Nat’l Democratic Policy Comm., 780 P.2d 1282, 1285 (1989) (en banc) (“[A] 

successor in interest to a party to an action that determines interests in property is 

subject to the preclusive effects of that action.” (citations omitted)).

We reject as without merit Szmania’s contention that defendants were timebarred from collecting on the note. See Edmundson v. Bank of Am., 378 P.3d 272, 

277-78 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016) (statute of limitations period on a claim to enforce 

an installment note accrues for each installment from the time it becomes due).

We lack jurisdiction to consider the district court’s order denying Szmania’s 

motion for reconsideration because Szmania failed to file an amended or separate 
 3 16-36055 

notice of appeal. See Whitaker v. Garcetti, 486 F.3d 572, 585 (9th Cir. 2007). 

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
### **CHAPTER 9D—OFFICE OF SENATE LEGAL COUNSEL**

Sec.
288.
Office of Senate Legal Counsel.
288a.
Senate Joint Leadership Group.
288b.
Requirements for authorizing representation activity.
288c.
Defending the Senate, committee, subcommittee, member, officer, or employee of Senate.
288d.
Enforcement of Senate subpena or order.
288e.
Intervention or appearance.
288f.
Immunity proceedings.
288g.
Advisory and other functions.
288h.
Defense of certain constitutional powers.
288i.
Representation conflict or inconsistency.
288j.
Consideration of resolutions to direct counsel.
288k.
Attorney General relieved of responsibility.
288 l.
Procedural provisions.
288m.
Contingent fund.
288n.
Travel and related expenses.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 02-024 February 21, 2002

NRC TO HOLD WORKSHOP MARCH 12 ON ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a public workshop on March 12 to discuss the

possible use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in its enforcement policy.

The workshop will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Kentlands Mansion, 320 Kent

Square Road, Gaithersburg, Maryland. 

ADR involves the use of voluntary methods to resolve conflicts and disputes. ADR techniques

normally make use of a neutral third-party to facilitate conflict or dispute resolutions. Techniques can

include facilitated discussions, mediation, fact-finding, mini-trials, and arbitration. In considering the

possible use of ADR, the agency has identified a number of issues that must be evaluated. These

include the point at which it would be appropriate to use ADR in the enforcement process and the

possible implications for the confidentiality of settlement discussions.

The objectives of the workshop will be to develop a better understanding of ADR techniques,

how they might apply to specific NRC enforcement scenarios, and the potential advantage and

disadvantages of the use of ADR in various parts of the NRC enforcement process.

The format of the workshop will be a facilitated discussion among invited participants

representing the interests of stakeholders who may be affected by the use of ADR in the NRC

enforcement process, as well as expert ADR practitioners from other agencies and private practice. 

The invited participants currently include people from the NRC Office of Enforcement, the Office of

the General Counsel, the Nuclear Energy Institute, and the Union of Concerned Scientists. 

 The workshop will be open to the public. Although the focus of the discussion will be among

the invited participants and the expert ADR practitioners, the audience will be able to participate in the

discussion at selected points during the workshop. Additional details will be available at:

http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/enforcement/public-involvement.html

The NRC has also extended the period for public comment from January 28 to March 29 on a

list of questions regarding ADR published in the December 14, 2001 edition of the Federal Register.

###
**EXHIBIT 10.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our reports dated December 19, 2006,accompanying the consolidated financial statements and schedule included in theAnnual Report of Novamerican Steel Inc. on Form 20-F for the yearended November 25, 2006. We hereby consent to the use of theaforementioned reports in this Annual Report on Form 20-F and theincorporation by reference of said reports in Novamerican Steel Inc.’sRegistration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-7688)effective May 12, 2000.

Chartered Accountants

Montréal, CanadaFebruary 22, 2007

----
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-02-0084 - Final Rule on Decommissioning Trust Provisions

Accession Number: ML020910324

Date Released: Thursday, November 21, 2002

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML020910202 - SECY-02-0084 - Final Rule on Decommissioning Trust Provisions (5 page(s), 5/15/2002)
    - ML020910219 - SECY-02-0084-FRN - Final Rule on Decommissioning Trust Provisions (80 page(s), 5/15/2002)
    - ML020910259 - SECY-02-0084-Attachment 2-Regulatory Analysis for Amending Reactor Decommissioning Trust Provisions (3 page(s), 5/15/2002)
    - ML020910282 - SECY-02-0084-Attachment 3-Regulatory Guide 1.159 - Assuring the Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors (60 page(s), 3/12/2002)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION FOR R ECONSIDERATION E N B ANC

Appellate case name: Victor Anthony Charles v

. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 11

- 00084

- CR

Trial court case num ber: 1258695

Trial court: 183rd District Court of Harris County

Date motion filed: September 16, 2013

Party filing motion: Victor Anthony Charles

It is ordered that the motion for en banc reconsideration is DEN I ED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Michael Massengale

Acting Individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Chief J ustice Radack, and Justices Jennings, Keyes, Higley, Bland, Sharp,

Massengale, Brown, and Huddle

Date: October 10, 2013
April 30, 2015 EPA/FMC Meeting on Sulfentrazone Registration Review

Potomac Yards South Room S

- 9100

10:00 to 11:00 am

Call in number is (866)299

- 3188, conference code (703)308

- 0128#

Meeting Agenda:

I. Introductions & Meeting Objective

– 5 min

II. Registration Review Updates & Schedule

– 10 min

III. R isk Mitigation Discussion

– 35 min

IV. Summary and Next Steps

– 10 min

Meeting Summary :

• T he OPP registration review team for sulfentrazone met with FMC, the technical registrant for this pre

- emergent broadleaf herbicide, to discuss mitigation measures.

• The primary risk concern for sulfentrazone is drift to non

- target plants and discussion

ce ntered on mitigation to minimize drift, especially from aerial application.

• Discussion focused on the importance of tightening up spray drift and herbicide resistance language and making it consistent across product labels, as appropriate.

• The EPA team shared documents with FMC on best management practices (BMPs) for boom spraying (by the American Society of Agricultural Engineers) and herbicide resistance (by the Weed Science Society of America) with FMC.

• The Proposed Interim Decision (PID) for sulfentrazone is scheduled to be released for comment in June 2015; the Final Interim Decision is scheduled for late 2015.

Meeting Participants :

• See attach ed sign in sheet.
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: www.nrc.gov

No. 02-056 May 2, 2002

NRC TO MEET WITH FIRSTENERGY MAY 7 

TO DISCUSS ROOT CAUSE OF DAVIS-BESSE VESSEL HEAD DEGRADATION

The staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will meet May 7 with representatives from

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company to discuss the licensee’s root cause analysis of the degradation

to the reactor pressure vessel head at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.

The meeting will be held from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. in the Commissioners' Conference Room in

 the agency's One White Flint North Building, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The meeting

 will be open to the public for observation and NRC officials will be available before the meeting

 adjourns to answer any questions. The meeting contacts are Stephen Sands at (301) 415-3154 and

 Douglas Pickett at (301) 415-1364. 

Interested individuals may listen to the meeting via telephone by calling: 888-810-3138 and

entering passcode 1234 at the prompt. One hundred and fifty phone lines will be available.

Davis-Besse, located at Oak Harbor, Ohio, shut down February 16 for refueling and

maintenance. Inspections revealed a cavity in the top of the reactor pressure vessel head caused by

boric acid corrosion. As announced March 12, the NRC sent an Augmented Inspection Team to the

site to monitor the licensee's investigation and evaluation of the degradation to the reactor pressure

vessel head and issued a bulletin requesting prompt information from all its pressurized water reactor

licensees on vessel head inspections. An exit meeting to discuss the team's findings was held in Oak

Harbor, Ohio, on April 5.

To help keep the public informed of its activities, NRC has established a section on its web site

where information about reactor pressure vessel head degradation is posted and updated, including

press releases, correspondence with NRC licensees and other related documents. The web address is:

 http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops-experience/vessel-head-degradation.html

###
#### § 143.4 Confidentiality of data.

The electronic data received and exchanged by a service bureau shall be considered confidential, and the service bureau shall maintain the accuracy of data received in the process of formatting and transmitting such data on behalf of a filer, and shall not disclose this data or any information connected therewith to any persons other than the filer or Customs (see § 111.24 of this chapter).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE REGISTRANT'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON
FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       6,222,870
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  261,209
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     29,624
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,635,037
<PP&E>                                       6,993,282
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,879,057
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,832,245
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          743,414
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 33,842,599
<COMMON>                                       129,951
<OTHER-SE>                                  36,952,326
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,832,245
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               415,575
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,464,930
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (5,049,355)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (5,049,355)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,049,355)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.53)
        

</TABLE>
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

 611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

 Arlington TX 76011- 4005

No. IV-03-006 Monday, March 17, 2003

CONTACT: Victor Dricks E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov

Phone: 817-860-8128 

 NRC TO MEET WITH STP NUCLEAR OPERATING CO. TO DISCUSS 

 PERFORMANCE OF SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT

 

 Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with representatives of STP Nuclear

Operating Company, on Monday, March 24, to discuss the results of the agency’s annual assessment

of safety performance at the South Texas Project nuclear plant. The facility, which has two operating

reactors, is located near Bay City, Texas. 

 The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation, is scheduled to begin at 7:00 

p.m. at the Bay City Civic Center, 201 Seventh Street, Bay City, TX. Before the session is adjourned,

NRC staff will be available to answer questions from the public on the safety performance of the plant,

as well as the role of the NRC in ensuring safe plant operation.

 The performance period to be discussed is January 1 to December 31, 2002. In addition, NRC

staff will provide an overview of how the agency’s Reactor Oversight Process works.

 A letter sent from the NRC Region IV Office to STP Nuclear Operating Co. addresses the

performance of the plant during the period and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is

available on the NRC web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/stp_2002q4.pdf

“Overall, South Texas Project Electric Generating Station operated in a manner that preserved

public health and safety and fully met all cornerstone objectives,” the letter says. However, because the

number of automatic reactor shutdowns at Unit 2 exceeded a threshold, NRC will schedule and

conduct a supplemental inspection there, in addition to the baseline inspections at the site.

In addition, the letter notes: “As you are aware, since the terrorist attacks of September 11,

2001, the NRC has issued several Orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and

improve guard force readiness. We have conducted inspections to review your implementation of these

requirements and have monitored your actions in response to changing threat advisories. For calendar

year 2003, we plan to continue these inspections and conduct portions of the security baseline

inspection program, as well as perform additional inspections to evaluate your compliance with new

requirements that may be ordered.”
Current performance information for South Texas Project Unit 1 is available on the NRC web

site at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/STP1/stp1_chart.html

Unit 2 information is at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/STP2/stp2_chart.html

###
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 204 (Friday, October 22, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 62063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23653]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Library of Medicine; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Board of 
Scientific Counselors, National Library of Medicine, October 14, 2004, 
9 a.m. to October 14, 2004, 5 p.m., National Library of Medicine, 
Building 38, 2nd Floor, Board Room, 8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 
20892 which was published in the Federal Register on August 10, 2004, 
69 FR 161.
    The meeting will be held on October 19, 2004, which is changed from 
the previous date of October 14, 2004. The meeting is partially Closed 
to the public.

    Dated: October 14, 2004.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 04-23653 Filed 10-21-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
§ 210.53 Motion filed after complaint. ( a ) A motion for temporary relief may be filed after the complaint, but must be filed prior to the Commission determination under § 210.10 on whether to institute an investigation. A motion filed after the complaint shall contain the information, documents, and evidence described in § 210.52 and must also make a showing that extraordinary circumstances exist that warrant temporary relief and that the moving party was not aware, and with due diligence could not have been aware, of those circumstances at the time the complaint was filed. When a motion for temporary relief is filed after the complaint but before the Commission has determined whether to institute an investigation based on the complaint, the 35-day period allotted under § 210.58 for review of the complaint and informal investigatory activity will begin to run anew from the date on which the motion was filed.
( b ) A motion for temporary relief may not be filed after an investigation has been instituted.
#### Richard M. WARR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 01-35763.

D.C. No. CV-00-03027-FVS.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 13, 2002 *.

Decided May 29, 2002.

Before FERNANDEZ, WARDLAW, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, appellant's request for oral argument is denied.

MEMORANDUM **

Richard Warr appeals pro se the district court’s summary judgment dismissing his action, which alleged damages as a result of the lack of irrigation water. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the summary judgment, *Barnett v. Centoni,*31 F.3d 813, 815 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam), and we affirm.

Warr contends that the district court lacked jurisdiction over his action. We disagree.

*694The district court properly exercised jurisdiction over this action after it was transferred from the Court of Federal Claims. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1631; *Miller v. Hambrick,*905 F.2d 259, 262 (9th Cir. 1990).

Warr’s remaining contentions lack merit.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 4.1

                        PRODUCUCTION CONSULTING AGREEMENT


     This Agreement when signed by Raven Moon Entertainment, Inc. located at 120
International Parkway, Suite 220, Heathrow, Florida 32746 hereafter referred to
as the "PRODUCTION COMPANY" and Mike Gibilisco, hereafter referred to as
"Consultant" shall constitute a binding agreement.

FOR GOOD CONSIDERATION the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged that both parties agree as follows:

     Effective immediately under the supervision of the PRODUCTION COMPANY and
its Executive Producers, J&B DiFrancesco, CONSULTANT shall supervise the
production of Television/Home Video programs of "Gina D's Kids Club", to be
produced and distributed to broadcast stations effective immediately until all
productions are fully completed to the satisfaction of the Production Company
and the Executive Producers, J&B DiFrancesco.

DUTIES:

1.   For a term of one year from the date hereof, the CONSULTANT shall be
     responsible for the supervision of all creative personnel, creative
     services, marketing materials, advertising materials, sub-contractors,
     technical services, non-technical services, duplication and distribution of
     all Television/Home Video productions described above to be professionally
     produced and delivered to broadcasters or video duplication facilities upon
     completion to the satisfaction of the Production Company and its Executive
     Producers, J&B DiFrancesco. The CONSULTANT will not be responsible for any
     unreasonable deadlines nor unreasonable approvals that could effect
     quality, productivity and delivery of such above mentioned supervised
     services due beyond the control of the CONSULTANT.

COMPENSATION:

2.   As payment in full for these services the CONSULTANT shall receive
     15,000,000 shares of common S-8 free trading Raven Moon Entertainment, Inc.
     stock.

3.   This is a complete understanding by both parties, which cannot be changed
     except in writing and signed by both parties.

4.   Both parties agree to settle any dispute by arbitration in Seminole County
     Florida.

ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO;

DATE: January 9, 2003
/s/  Mike Gibilisco
----------------------------------
     Mike Gibilisco



Raven Moon Entertainment, Inc.


By:  /s/  J. DiFrancesco
   --------------------------------
          J. DiFrancesco, President
#### § 127.11 Unclaimed merchandise.

Any entered or unentered merchandise (except merchandise under section 557, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1557), but including merchandise entered for transportation in bond or for exportation) which remains in Customs custody for 6 months from the date of importation or a lesser period for special merchandise as provided by § 127.28 (c), (d), and (h), and without all estimated duties and storage or other charges having been paid, shall be considered unclaimed and abandoned.

[T.D. 79-221, 44 FR 46814, Aug. 9, 1979, as amended by T.D. 98-74, 63 FR 51290, Sept. 25, 1998]
[Exhibit 10.4]


                       Consent of Director


November 1, 2002



Gentlemen:

I hereby consent to the use of my name in the registration of the
securities of Link Plus Corp. (Tax ID. # 52-1018174).

Sincerely,



/s/Frank M. Hardy
2702 Chariton Street
Oakton, VA  22124