alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13** 

**- 1706** 

WEIHE ZHANG

,

Petitioner

,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General

,

Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted : October 8, 2013 Decided: November 4, 2013

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.

Weihe Zhang, P etitioner Pro Se

. Lindsay Corliss , Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Weihe Zhang , a native and citizen of the People’s

Republic of China

, petition s for review of an order of the Board

of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) denying his motion to remand. *

W e have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find no

abuse of discretion. See Onyeme v. INS , 146 F.3d 227, 234 (4th

Cir. 1998) (setting forth standard of r eview for motions to

remand ). We therefore deny the petition for review for the

reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Zhang (B.I.A. May 2,

2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the ma terials

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

PETITION DENIED

* The Board’s order also dismissed Zhang’s appeal from the immigration judge’s denial of Zhang’s requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Because Zhang has failed to raise any challenges in his infor mal brief to the agency’s denial of these applications, including any challenges to the agency’s initial adverse credibility determination , we find that these issues are
now waived. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (directing appealing parties to present specific ar guments in an informal brief and stating
that this c ourt’s review on appeal is limited to the issues raised in the informal brief); cf. Wahi v. Charleston Area Med.
Ctr., Inc. , 562 F.3d 599, 607 (4th Cir. 2009) (limiting appellate review to arguments raise d in the brief in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9)(A)).
Unassociated Document








    


    701
      N Green Valley Pkwy, Suite 200, Henderson, NV 89074 702-990-3387/ fax
      702-990-3301

    


    From
      The Desk Of:

    Stanley
      L. Teeple, Secretary

    stanteeple@msn.com

     

    SCHEDULE
      3.1(a)

    


    TO

    


    RESTRICTED
      EQUITY PURCHASE AGREEMENT

    


    The
      Company has no subsidiaries
Exhibit 13.2

906 Certification

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies
and Gentlemen:

In connection with the periodic report of NetEase.com, Inc. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Onward Choi, the Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of
the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

1. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

This Certificate has not been, and shall not be deemed,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date: June 26, 2008



|       |  |                               
|------ |  | ------------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Onward Choi               
|Name:  |  | Onward Choi                   
|Title: |  | Acting Chief Financial Officer
March 31, 2016 

The Honorable Earl Ray Tomblin 

Governor of West Virginia 

Charleston, WV 25305 

Dear Governor Tomblin: 

In 1976, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) adopted a recommendation 

from several State organizations, including the National Governors Association, that each State 

appoint a single person to act as a liaison to the NRC to help improve Federal/State 

cooperation. The NRC looks to the Governor-appointed State Liaison Officer to be the primary 

communication channel between the State and the NRC. The State Liaison Officer serves as 

the key person in the State to keep the Governor and other State agencies informed about 

issues under the NRC’s jurisdiction (specifically matters addressing nuclear regulation, nuclear 

security, nuclear emergency preparedness, and radiological public health and safety) and to 

provide the NRC with State information on particular nuclear safety, security, and 

environmental issues. 

I am writing to request the continued participation of the State of West Virginia in the 

NRC’s State Liaison Officer program. The NRC has been working with Mr. Jason Frame, 

Radiological Health Program Chief in the West Virginia Office of Environmental Health 

Services, to keep you informed of our programs and activities. The NRC will continue to work 

with Mr. Frame; however, to ensure continued clear communication between the NRC and the 

State of West Virginia, I would appreciate your written affirmation of Mr. Frame, or another 

individual as your selected appointee as State Liaison Officer for the State of West Virginia. 

I am providing you with a copy of the NRC brochure entitled, “State Liaison Officer 

Program,” which provides background information on, and describes the role of, the State 

Liaison Officer. I am also enclosing a copy of the NRC “2015-2016 Information Digest,” which 

provides information describing the NRC’s mission and its regulatory programs. 

If you or your staff have any questions concerning this correspondence or wish to obtain 

additional information about the State Liaison Officer program, please contact Mr. Daniel 

Collins, Director, Division of Material Safety, State, Tribal, and Rulemaking Programs, Office of 

Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, at (301) 415-3340 or by e-mail at 

Daniel.Collins@nrc.gov. 
- 2 - 

I thank you in advance for your assistance. The Commission looks forward to the 

continued participation by the State of West Virginia in the NRC’s State Liaison Officer 

program. 

 

Sincerely, 

/RA/ 

 Stephen G. Burns 

Enclosures: 

1. NRC Brochure, 

 “State Liaison Officer Program” 

2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

 2015-2016 Information Digest, 

 NUREG-1350, Volume 27 

 

cc: w/o enclosures 

 Jason Frame, West Virginia Department 

 of Health and Human Resources
The Library of Congress >> Especially  for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards >> MARC 21

## 2003 Edition

----

## Table of Contents

- Introduction  (PDF) General Information  Structure and Assignment of Codes  Arrangement of the List  Changes in the Codes  MARC 21 Formats and Fields in which Codes are Used  Code Maintenance

- Name Sequence  (HTML)

- Code Sequence  (HTML)

- Regional Sequence  (HTML)

- Changes in 2003    printed edition  (PDF)
- Changes to online list since 2003 printed edition  (HTML)

An XML version is available for use in applications at: www.loc.gov/standards/codelists/countries.xml

----

MARC 21 HOME >> MARC Code List for Countries 

| The Library of Congress >> Especially    for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards    (02/24/2012    ) | Contact Us |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Veterans Affairs

In compliance with section 13 of Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) notice is hereby given that the 2004 Annual Report of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Advisory Committee on Women Veterans has been issued. The report summarizes activities and recommendations of the Committee on matters relative to VA programs and policies affecting women veterans. It is available for public inspection at two locations: Mr. Richard Yarnall, Federal Advisory Committee Desk, Library of Congress, Anglo-American Acquisition Division, Government Documents Section, Room LM-B42, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., Washington DC 20540-4172; and Department of Veterans Affairs, Center for Women Veterans, Suite 438 (00W), 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420.

Dated: October 1, 2004.

By Direction of the Secretary.

E. Philip Riggin, 

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 04-25726  Filed 11-18-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
|   | (1) | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)      of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                         | By:    | /s/Gadi Aner                                           |
|------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------|
|                         |   |   Gadi      Aner                             |
|                         |   |   Chief      Executive Officer and Chairman  |
|                         |   |                                                   |
|                         | By:    | /s/Gabby Klausner                                      |
|                         |   |   Gabby      Klausner                        |
|                         |   |   Treasurer      and Chief Financial Officer |
|                         |   |                                                   |
| Date:      November 22, 2010 |   |                                                   |

----
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 228 (Monday, November 29, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69382-69383]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26320]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration


Notice of a Meeting

    Pursuant to Pub. L. 92-463, notice is hereby given of a meeting of 
the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) 
National Advisory Council in December 2004.
    The SAMHSA National Advisory Council will meet in an open session 
December 7 from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and on December 8 from 9 a.m. to 
11:30 a.m. The meeting will include a SAMHSA Administrator's Report, as 
well as discussions on seclusion and restraint, SAMHSA's HIV/AIDS and 
hepatitis activities, criminal justice issues, and SAMHSA's American 
Indian and Alaska Native activities. There will also be updates on 
SAMHSA's disaster readiness and response activities and legislative 
issues.
    Attendance by the public will be limited to space available. Public 
comments are welcome. Please

[[Page 69383]]

communicate with the individual listed as contact below to make 
arrangements to comment or to request special accommodations for 
persons with disabilities.
    Substantive program information, a summary of the meeting, and a 
roster of Council members may be obtained either by accessing the 
SAMHSA Council Web site, http://www.samhsa.gov/council/council or by 
communicating with the contact whose name and telephone number is 
listed below. The transcript for the meeting will also be available on 
the SAMHSA Council Web site.

    Committee Name: SAMHSA National Advisory Council.
    Date/Time: Tuesday, December 7, 2004, 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. 
(Open). Wednesday, December 8, 2004, 9 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. (Open).
    Place: 1 Choke Cherry Road, Sugarloaf Room, Rockville, Maryland 
20857.
    Contact: Toian Vaughn, Executive Secretary, 1 Choke Cherry Road, 
Room 8-1089, Rockville, Maryland 20857, Telephone: (240) 276-2307; 
FAX: (240) 276-2252 and E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3743585e565919415642505f597744565a5f4456195f5f4419505841"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="71051e18101f5f07100416191f3102101c1902105f1919025f161e07">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: November 22, 2004.
Toian Vaughn,
Committee Management Officer, SAMHSA.
[FR Doc. 04-26320 Filed 11-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4162-20-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Editorial Note on Part 303
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 303 appear at 68 FR 56555, Oct. 1, 2003.

§ 303.3 Determination of the total annual duty-exemption. ( a ) *Procedure for determination.* If, after considering the productive capacity of the territorial watch industry and the economic interests of the territories, the Secretaries determine that the amount of the total annual duty-exemption, or the territorial shares of the total amount, should be changed, they shall publish in the Federal Register a proposed limit on the quantity of watch units which may enter duty-free into the customs territory of the United States and proposed territorial shares thereof and, after considering comments, establish the limit and shares by Federal Register notice. If the Secretaries take no action under this section, they shall make the allocations in accordance with the limit and shares last established by this procedure.
( b ) *Standards for determination.* ( 1 ) Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the limit established for any year may be 7,000,000 units if the limit established for the preceding year was a smaller amount.
( 2 ) Subject to paragraph (c) of this section, the total annual duty-exemption shall not be decreased by more than 10% of the quantity established for the preceding calendar year, or increased, if the resultant total is larger than 7,000,000, by more than 20% of the quantity established for the calendar year immediately preceding.
( 3 ) The Secretaries shall determine the limit after considering the interests of the territories; the domestic or international trade policy objectives of the United States; the need to maintain the competitive nature of the territorial industry; the total contribution of the industry to the economic well-being of the territories; and the territorial industry's utilization of the total duty-exemption established in the preceding year.
( c ) *Determinations based on consumption.* ( 1 ) The Secretaries shall notify the International Trade Commission whenever they have reason to believe duty-free watch imports from the territories will exceed 9,000,000 units, or whenever they make a preliminary determination that the total annual duty-exemption should exceed 10,000,000 units.
( 2 ) In addition to the limitations in paragraph (b) of this section, the Secretaries shall not establish a limit exceeding one-ninth of apparent domestic consumption if such consumption, as determined by International Trade Commission, exceeds 90 million units.
[49 FR 17740, Apr. 25, 1984, as amended at 50 FR 7170, Feb. 21, 1985; 50 FR 43568, Oct. 28, 1985; 53 FR 52994, Dec. 30, 1988]
§ 1025.65 Persons not attorneys. ( a ) *Filing and approval of proof of qualifications.* Any person who is not an attorney at law may be admitted to appear in any adjudicative proceedings as a representative of any party or participant if that person files proof to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer that he/she possesses the necessary knowledge of administrative procedures, technical, or other qualifications to render valuable service in the proceedings and is otherwise competent to advise and assist in the presentation of matters in the proceedings. An application by a person not an attorney at law for admission to appear in any proceedings shall be submitted in writing to the Secretary, not later than thirty (30) days prior to the hearing. The application shall set forth in detail the applicant's qualifications to appear in the proceedings.
( b ) *Exception.* Any person who is not an attorney at law and whose application has not been approved shall not be permitted to appear in Commission proceedings. However, this provision shall not apply to any person who appears before the Commission on his/her own behalf or on behalf of any corporation, partnership, or unincorporated association of which the person is a partner or general officer.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SRM-SECY-15-0055:  Denial of Petition for Rulemaking Submitted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (PRM-51-29).

Accession Number: ML15209A954

Date Released: Wednesday, September 2, 2015

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.
    - ML15209A959 - SRM-SECY-15-0055:  Denial of Petition for Rulemaking Submitted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (PRM-51-29). (1 page(s), 7/28/2015)
    - ML15209A962 - SRM-SECY-15-0055:  Enclosure 1 - Petition for Rulemaking Denial . (27 page(s), 7/28/2015)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
#### The City of Danville, Plaintiff-Appellee, *v.*Evelyn O. Reffett, Defendant-Appellant.

(No. 12561;

Fourth District

June 27, 1974.

*Rehearing denied August 21, 1974.*

Whitney D. Hardey, of Land of Lincoln Legal Assistance Foundation, Inc., of Danville (Daniel K. Mumme, Senior Law Student, of counsel), for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

Mr. JUSTICE CLYDESDALE

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is an appeal by Evelyn O. Reffett, defendant, who was found guilty by the court of restricting and obstructing a police officer in violation of a city ordinance of the City of Danville. The court assessed a fine against the defendant in the sum of $10 and costs in the sum of $5.

Prior to trial, defendant filed an application to sue or defend as a poor person and requested the appointment of counsel. Both requests were denied by the court without hearing.

On appeal, the defendant raised the following issues: (1) Should an indigent defendant, as a matter of right, be advised of the right to a jury trial in a municipal ordinance violation case; (2) should an indigent have a right to the appointment of counsel in a municipal ordinance violation case; and (3) does the appropriation of bond money to satisfy a fine and costs amount to an unconstitutional taking of property where defendant claims the bond money was welfare money received by her for aid to her dependent children?

The City did not file a responsive brief on appeal and the only oral argument before this court was by the appellant-defendant.

Although substantial issues have been raised by the defendant, we do *42not propose to serve in the dual role of advocate and judge. This is a position termed “abhorrent” by the court in *People v. Spinelli,*83 Ill.App.2d 391, 227 N.E.2d 779.

The City’s failure to file a brief leaves the judgment of the trial court without the support of brief and argument to which it is justly entitled. Since the City has abandoned its case on appeal, we see no reason to go into the merits. We have decided to reverse the judgment pro forma. *Spinelli; People ex rel. Pullman Bank & Trust Co. v. Fitzgerald,*14 Ill.App.3d 247, 302 N.E.2d 429; *Shinn v. County Board of School Trustees,*130 Ill.App.2d 908, 266 N.E.2d 123.

The judgment of the circuit court of Vermifion County is reversed and the clerk of the circuit court is directed to return the sum of $15 to the appeHant.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

TRAPP, P. J., and SIMKINS, J., concur.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted May 12, 2010

Decided May 13, 2010

Before

                     KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge

ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge

JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge

No. 09‐3453

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

           Plaintiff‐Appellee,

v.

DAVID L. BROWN,

Defendant‐Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Central District of Illinois.

No. 1:09‐CR‐10015‐001

Michael M. Mihm,

Judge.

O R D E R

David Brown pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute more than 50

grams of cocaine base.  See 21 U.S.C. § 846.  At Brown’s sentencing hearing the government

moved to reduce his sentence below the life‐time statutory minimum to reflect the value of

his assistance in the investigation and prosecution of other matters.  See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e).

The district court granted that motion and sentenced Brown to 244 months’ imprisonment,

but refused to consider other mitigating factors to further reduce his sentence.  Brown

appeals, but his appointed counsel has concluded that his appeal is frivolous and moves to

withdraw.  See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967).  We invited Brown to respond to

counsel’s motion, but he has declined to do so.  See CIR. R. 51(b).  We limit our review to the

potential issue identified in counsel’s facially adequate brief.  See United States v. Schuh, 289

F.3d 968, 973‐74 (7th Cir. 2002).

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 09‐3453 Page 2

Counsel initially advises that Brown does not want his guilty plea vacated, and thus

properly omits any discussion of the adequacy of the plea colloquy or the voluntariness of

the plea. See United States v. Knox, 287 F.3d 667, 670‐71 (7th Cir. 2002).  

The only potential issue counsel identifies is whether Brown could challenge the

court’s refusal to further reduce his sentence for reasons other than his substantial

assistance.  But we agree that this contention would be frivolous.  As counsel notes, once a

district court decides that a defendant’s cooperation justifies a sentence below the statutory

floor, see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e), the court may not rely upon other mitigating factors in

§ 3553(a) to further reduce the sentence.  United States v. Johnson, 580 F.3d 666, 672‐74 (7th

Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 1115 (2010).

Accordingly, we GRANT counsel’s motion to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal.