alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JULIO ARRESCURRENAGA; et al., 

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-70967

Agency Nos. A075-540-994

 A075-540-995

 A075-540-996

 A075-540-997

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 29, 2010 ** 

Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Julio Arrescurrenaga and Jacinta Malaver (“adult petitioners”), and their

children Carolina and Andrea, natives and citizens of Peru, petition for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming the immigration

judge’s decision denying their applications for asylum and withholding of removal

FILED

JUL 07 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-70967

application. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo

questions of law and review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. 

See Cruz-Navarro v. INS, 232 F.3d 1024, 1028 (9th Cir. 2000). We deny in part

and grant in part the petition for review. 

The BIA found that adult petitioners had failed to establish past persecution

because the attacks they suffered were inherent risks in their duties as police

officers. The record does not compel the conclusion that adult petitioners suffered

harm on account of their actual or imputed political opinion, or as members of a

particular social group consisting of police officers. See id. at 1029–30. 

Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s finding that adult petitioners do not

have a well-founded fear of future persecution based on their status as former

police officers because they failed to show that the government is unwilling or

unable to protect them. See Nahrvani v. Gonzales, 399 F.3d 1148, 1153–54 (9th

Cir. 2005).

Andrea and Carolina argued to the BIA that they suffered past persecution

and have a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of their membership

in a particular social group, namely their family. The BIA, however, did not

address their claims. Accordingly, we grant the petition with respect to Andrea

and Carolina’s claims and remand for the BIA to address them in the first instance. 
3 07-70967

See Sagadyak v. Gonzales, 405 F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir. 2005) (“the BIA [is] not

free to ignore arguments raised by a petitioner”); see also INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S.

12, 16–18 (2002) (per curiam). We also grant the petition and remand as to

Carolina’s claim that she is eligible for humanitarian asylum relief under 8 C.F.R.

§ 1208.13(b)(1)(iii)(B), due to her growth hormone deficiency, because the BIA

also failed to address this claim. See id.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;

REMANDED.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 205 (Monday, October 25, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62279-62280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23805]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Bureau of Customs and Border Protection


Notice of Cancellation of Customs Broker National Permit

AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of 
Homeland Security.

ACTION: General Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 641 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 
(19 U.S.C. 1641) and the Customs Regulations (19 CFR 111.51), the 
following Customs broker national permits are canceled without 
prejudice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Permit
                Name                    No.           Issuing  port
------------------------------------------------------------------------
J.E. Lowden & Co...................   99-00190   Headquarters.
Word Asia Logistics, Inc...........   99-00281   Headquarters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------



[[Page 62280]]

    Dated: October 8, 2004.
Jayson P. Ahern,
Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field Operations.
[FR Doc. 04-23805 Filed 10-22-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
§ 2414.5 Communications prohibited. Except as provided in § 2414.6, ex parte communications prohibited by § 2414.2 shall include: ( a ) Such communications, when written, if copies thereof are not contemporaneously served by the communicator on all parties to the proceeding in accordance with the provisions of part 2429 of this chapter; and
( b ) Such communications, when oral, unless advance notice thereof is given by the communicator to all parties in the proceeding and adequate opportunity afforded to them to be present.
#### In the Matter of Leslie Leasing Corp., Appellant. John L. Jerro et al., Doing Business as Jerro Bros., et al., Respondents.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, with $10 costs. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 876.]
§ 1201.144 Hearing procedures; referring the record. ( a ) The official designated to hold an informal hearing requested by a career appointee whose removal from the Senior Executive Service has been proposed under 5 U.S.C. 3592(a)(2) and 5 CFR 359.502 will be a judge, as defined at § 1201.4(a) of this part.
( b ) The appointee, the appointee's representative, or both may appear and present arguments in an informal hearing before the judge. A verbatim record of the proceeding will be made. The appointee has no other procedural rights before the judge or the Board.
( c ) The judge will refer a copy of the record to the Special Counsel, the Office of Personnel Management, and the employing agency for whatever action may be appropriate.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 210 (Monday, November 1, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 63434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24339]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Art Advisory Panel--Notice of Closed Meeting

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of closed meeting of Art Advisory Panel.

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

SUMMARY: Closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held in 
Washington, DC.

DATES: The meeting will be held December 2, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held on 
December 2, 2004, in Room 4200E beginning at 9:30 a.m., Franklin Court 
Building, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Carolan, C:AP:AS, 1099 14th 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. Telephone (202) 435-5609 (not a toll 
free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that a 
closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held on December 2, 
2004, in Room 4200E beginning at 9:30 a.m., Franklin Court Building, 
1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005.
    The agenda will consist of the review and evaluation of the 
acceptability of fair market value appraisals of works of art involved 
in Federal income, estate, or gift tax returns. This will involve the 
discussion of material in individual tax returns made confidential by 
the provisions of 26 U.S.C. 6103.
    A determination as required by section 10(d) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act has been made that this meeting is concerned 
with matters listed in section 552b(c)(3), (4), (6), and (7), and that 
the meeting will not be open to the public.

David B. Robison,
Chief, Appeals.
[FR Doc. 04-24339 Filed 10-29-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

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

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 04-147 November 24, 2004

NRC INCREASES CIVIL MONETARY PENALTIES TO REFLECT INFLATION

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is increasing the civil penalties it can impose on

licensees, effective Nov. 26, 2004. The maximum fine the NRC can impose per violation per day will

be $130,000 for power reactors and gaseous diffusion plants, an increase of $10,000 over the previous

maximum. An increase is mandated by Congress at least once every four years to account for inflation. 

The penalties for other types of licensees are also being similarly adjusted. The maximum fine

for test reactors, for instance, has been increased to $13,000 and the maximum fine for medical

materials users is now $6,500.

The NRC is not required to issue fines at the maximum level and uses its discretion to

determine an appropriate civil penalty on a case-by-case basis for violations identified through

inspections and investigations. The last civil penalty increase enacted by the NRC was in November

2000.

In keeping with past practices, when the Commission initiates policy changes, the public can

provide feedback; the deadline for comments is Dec. 27, 2004. Instructions on submitting comments

are posted in the Oct. 26, 2004, Federal Register or can be found through the Enforcement Policy page

of the NRC Web site, at http: //www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/enforcement/enforce-pol.html.

###
**EXHIBIT 32.1****Certification of Chief Executive Officer of HypercomCorporation****pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to****Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**     I certify that: (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K forthe year ended December 31, 2004 of Hypercom Corporation(the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, and (ii) the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of Hypercom Corporation. By:     /s/ C.S. Alexander       Christopher S. Alexander     Chief Executive OfficerMarch 21, 2005
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle IL 60532

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov 

No. III-03-055 August 1, 2003

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

NRC STAFF PROPOSES $3,000 FINE AGAINST MILWAUKEE HOSPITAL

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a $3,000 fine against Columbia

Hospital, located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, for failing to secure NRC-licensed material from

unauthorized access, as required by NRC regulations.

In November of last year, an NRC inspector, who was performing a routine inspection in the

nuclear medicine department at Columbia Hospital, was able to enter the laboratory containing NRClicensed radioactive material, used in nuclear medicine, without being challenged by hospital staff. 

The technologist on duty was engaged in another activity and did not have an unobstructed view of all

access points to the lab where nuclear material is stored. He had also set up a blocking device that

prevented the lab door from fully closing. This allowed unauthorized access during periods in which

the lab was not under surveillance. 

A subsequent investigation by NRC’s Office of Investigations determined that this violation

was willful.

The hospital’s corrective actions include ensuring that the door to the nuclear lab is secure;

retraining all technologists assigned to the nuclear medicine department on regulatory requirements for

security of nuclear material; and periodically verifying that the lab door is secure.

The hospital has until August 29 to either pay the fine or to protest it. If the fine is protested

and subsequently imposed by the NRC staff, the company may request a hearing.

The letter to the hospital is available from the Region III Office of Public Affairs or online at:

http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/enforcement/current.html. The inspection report can be

viewed at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html by entering accession number

ML030150198. Assistance in using the web-based document collection is available by calling the

NRC Public Document Room at 800-397-4209.

###
### SUBCHAPTER I—MARINE RESOURCES AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of-- American Systems Corporation Under Contract No. N62583-08-D-O 136 APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: ) ) ) ) ) ASBCA No. 60320
Joseph G. Billings, Esq. Katherine B. Hill, Esq.

Miles & Stockbridge P.C. Baltimore, MD APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: Ronald J. Borro, Esq. Navy ChiefTrial Attorney Anthony K. Hicks, Esq.

Trial Attorney ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. Dated: 14 July 2016

/ MARKN. STEMPLE Administrative Judge Acting Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCANo. 60320, Appeal ofAmerican Systems Corporation, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2480
DARRELL E. BYRD, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JOE ROGERS; CHAMBERS USA WASTE, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. W illiams, Senior District Judge. (CA-96-89-3) Submitted: July 10, 1997 Decided: July 22, 1997 Before RUSSELL, HALL, and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Darrell E. Byrd, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Jon David Becker, JON D. BECKER & ASSOCIATES, Virginia Beach, Virginia; Ruth Litvin, DIAMONSTEIN, BECKER & STALEY, P.L.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Darrell E. Byrd, Sr. appeals the district court's order entering judgment in favor of the Defendants in this action filed under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"), 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Byrd v. Rogers , No. CA-96-89-3 (E.D. Va. Sept. 23, 1996). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
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-03-036 August 19, 2003

Contact: Victor Dricks E-Mail: opa4@nrc.gov

Phone: 817-860-8128

NRC PROPOSES $6,000 FINE

 FOR LONGVIEW INSPECTION, INC. OF HOUSTON, TX

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a fine of $6,000 against

Longview Inspection, Inc., of Houston, Texas, for violating NRC radioactive material security

requirements.

In a letter to the company, Thomas P. Gwynn, Acting Administrator of the NRC’s Region

IV office in Arlington, Texas, said that as a result of an NRC inspection on April 11, the agency

determined that the company violated NRC requirements associated with the control of

radioactive materials. “During an inspection of a temporary job site in Janesville, Wisconsin, an

NRC inspector determined that Longview radiography personnel were not maintaining adequate

surveillance of a radiography camera, as required,” Mr. Gwynn said.

“In particular, we noted that this incident appeared to be very similar to one which

occurred on October 9, 2001, which resulted in the NRC issuing escalated enforcement action to

Longview,” Mr. Gwynn said. 

The company said it has taken corrective actions by discussing the incident with all

radiography personnel to stress the importance of securing industrial radiographic devices,

distributing a memo reinforcing radiation safety requirements, conducting more frequent and

unannounced audits of radiography personnel by radiation safety and management personnel, and

creating incentives for radiographers and regional managers to follow safety requirements.

The NRC has classified the violations as a Severity Level III problem, which carries a

$6,000 fine. The agency uses a four-level severity scale in which Severity Level I is the most

serious. The company has 30 days to either pay the civil penalty or to challenge the proposed

fine.
- 2 -

The NRC’s letter, its enclosures, and the company’s response will be made available to

interested members of the public through the agency’s public electronic reading room at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.Help in accessing these documents is available from

the NRC Public Document Room at (301) 415-4737 or at 1-800-397-4209.

###
#### Dora Shapiro, Respondent, v. Julius Shapiro, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Nolan, P. J., Johnston, Sneed, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ.
§ 179.204 Applicability of regulations. These regulations are to be followed for all OPM collections (except those involving retirement, life, and health insurance debts for recovery by the Associate Director for Retirement and Insurance) in instances where: ( a ) OPM is owed a debt by an individual currently employed by another agency;
( b ) OPM is owed a debt by an individual who is a current employee of OPM; or
( c ) OPM currently employs an individual who owes a debt to another Federal agency. Upon receipt of proper certification from the creditor agency, OPM will offset the debtor-employee's salary in accordance with these regulations.
<Page>

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Independent Public
Accountants" incorporated by reference into this Post-Effective Amendment
No. 7 to the Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-43799) of Fortis
Benefits Insurance Company and to the incorporation by reference therein of
our report dated February 17, 2000, with respect to the financial statements
of Fortis Benefits Insurance Company included in the Prospectus and Statement of
Additional Information of Post-Effective Amendment No. 5 to the Registration
Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-43799) filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Minneapolis, Minnesota                                    /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
January 21, 2003
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle IL 60532

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

No. III-04-007 February 6, 2004

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

TELECONFERENCES AVAILABLE FOR FEBRUARY 12 DAVIS-BESSE MEETINGS

Teleconference capability will be set up for interested persons unable to attend the two public

meetings on the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant to be held on February 12 in Oak Harbor, Ohio.

The two public meetings will be: 

 2 p.m. (EST) - Meeting to discuss the preliminary findings of the followup Restart

Readiness Inspection and the followup Management and Human Performance

Inspection, which has been evaluating the actions taken by the utility to improve the

"safety culture" at Davis-Besse.

 6 p.m. (EST) - Meeting between the NRC Davis-Besse Oversight Panel and FirstEnergy

Nuclear Operating Company officials to discuss the basis for the utility’s request for

authorization to restart reactor operations.

Persons wishing to participate in the teleconferences should call toll-free 888/642-8528 and

give the pass code of “Davis-Besse.” The same number will be used for both meetings.

Both meetings will be at the Camp Perry Clubhouse, 1000 Lawrence Road, Bldg. 600, on

Highway 2 west of Port Clinton. A picture identification is required to enter Camp Perry; the guards

will provide visitors with directions to the meeting site.

The public is invited to observe the business portion of each meeting and will have an

opportunity to make comments and ask questions of the NRC staff before the meetings are adjourned.

The business portion of each meeting is expected to last about two hours; about one hour will

be available for questions and comments from the public in the first meeting, and about two hours will

be available in the second meeting.

There will be no decision on possible restart during the 6 p.m. meeting. Following the meeting, 

the NRC’s Davis-Besse Oversight Panel will review the information presented by the company, along

with the results of NRC inspections over the past two years.

The panel will submit its recommendation to James Caldwell, Regional Administrator for NRC

Region III. Mr. Caldwell will make a decision on the possible restart after conferring with other senior
-2-

NRC officials. The decision will be based on the agency’s assessment of the ability of FirstEnergy to

start up and operate the plant safely.

Extensive information on the NRC’s regulatory activities at Davis-Besse is available on the

agency’s web site: http://www.nrc.gov - select “Davis-Besse” from the key topics menu.

# # #
### §179v. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Librarian for the first fiscal year beginning on or after October 11, 1996, and each succeeding fiscal year through fiscal year 2026 such sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of sections 179l to 179w of this title, but in no fiscal year shall such sum exceed $250,000.

(Pub. L. 104–285, title I, §112, Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3382; Pub. L. 110–336, §3(a)(1)(A), Oct. 2, 2008, 122 Stat. 3727; Pub. L. 114–217, §3(a), July 29, 2016, 130 Stat. 840.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2016—Pub. L. 114–217 substituted "through fiscal year 2026" for "through fiscal year 2016".

2008—Pub. L. 110–336 inserted "for the first fiscal year beginning on or after October 11, 1996, and each succeeding fiscal year through fiscal year 2016" after "the Librarian".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2008 Amendment

Pub. L. 110–336, §3(a)(1)(C), Oct. 2, 2008, 122 Stat. 3727, provided that: "The amendments made by this paragraph [amending this section and section 179w of this title] shall take effect as if included in the enactment of the National Film Preservation Act of 1996 [Pub. L. 104–285, title I]."
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
of United Rentals, Inc. (Form S-3 No.'s 333-41419-99, 333-70151, 333-70255,
333-64463, 333-86197 and 333-57916), the Registration Statement of United
Rentals, Inc. (Form S-8 No. 333-70345) pertaining to the 1997 Stock Option Plan,
1998 Stock Option Plan, and 1998 Supplemental Stock Option Plan, the
Registration Statements of United Rentals, Inc. (Form S-8 No.'s 333-74091 and
333-87903) pertaining to the options outstanding in connection with the 1997
Performance Award Plan of U.S. Rentals assumed pursuant to the merger with U.S.
Rentals, the Registration Statement of United Rentals, Inc. (Form S-8 No.
333-39770) pertaining to the United Rentals, Inc. 401(k) Investment Plan and
United Rentals, Inc. Acquisition Plan and the Registration Statement of United
Rentals, Inc. (Form S-8 No. 333-60458) pertaining to the United Rentals, Inc.
2001 Stock Plan, and to the use of our report dated February 23, 2001, except
for Note 2, paragraphs 9, 10 and 11 and Note 17 as to which the date is
September 28, 2001, included in the amended Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) of
United Rentals, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000, with respect to the
Consolidated Financial Statements, as amended, included in this Amendment No. 1
on Form 10-K/A.


                                                          /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP


MetroPark, New Jersey
October 8, 2001