alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Mafua Heuaha VAILOLO, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-70022.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 12, 2007.*

Filed March 15, 2007.

Mafua Heuaha Vailolo, Eloy, AZ, pro se.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, District Counsel, Office of the District Chief Counsel, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Phoenix, AZ, Joan E. Smiley, Esq., Richard M. Evans, Esq., DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: KOZINSKI, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Mafua Heuaha Vailolo, a native and citizen of Tonga, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for lawful permanent resident cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction.

The agency denied Vailolo’s cancellation of removal application in the exercise of discretion. We lack jurisdiction to review this determination. *See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft,*327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir. 2003) (“We [have] interpreted [8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)®] to encompass all discretionary decisions involved in the cancellation of removal context, including the ultimate discretionary decision to deny relief.”); *see also Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales,*424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005).

We also conclude that Vailolo has failed to “allege at least a colorable constitutional violation” over which we could exercise jurisdiction. *See Martinez-Rosas,*424 F.3d at 930 (“Martinez-Rosas’ claim that the IJ denied her right to due process by misapplying the facts of her case to the applicable law does not meet this requirement.”).

Finally, we lack jurisdiction to review Vailolo’s contention that the IJ’s decision was impermissible boilerplate. *See Fernandez v. Gonzales,*439 F.3d 592, 604 (9th Cir.2006) (“As we have already determined that we are without jurisdiction to review the [agency’s] conclusion on the merits, the *540concerns ... about our ability to review inadequately reasoned or cursory [agency] decisions when jurisdiction *is*present do not apply.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
FW:Veolia SOB Veolia SOB

Reed,Michael Michael Michael to: David Ogulei 12/14/2012 04:23 PM

History: This message has been replied to.

If this language needs to be changed I will let you know.

Michael T. Reed, CAAPP Unit Manager

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

BOA/DAPC/Permit Section

1021 N. Grand Ave East

Springfield, Illinois 62794

Michael.Reed@illinois.gov

Office: 217.782.4651 | Fax 217.524.5023

E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail message, including any attachments, is 

for the intended recipient(s) only. This e-mail and any attachments might contain information that is 

confidential, legally privileged or otherwise protected or exempt from disclosure under applicable 

law. If you are not a named recipient, or if you are named but believe that you received this e -mail in 

error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or return e -mail and promptly delete this 

e-mail and any attachments and copies thereof from your system. If you are not the intended 

recipient, please be aware that any copying, distribution, dissemination, disclosure or other use of 

this e-mail and any attachments is unauthorized and prohibited. Your receipt of this message is not

intended to waive any applicable privilege or claim of confidentiality , and any prohibited or 

unauthorized disclosure is not binding on the sender or the Illinois Environmental Protection 

Agency. Thank you for your cooperation.

From: Pressnall, Chris 

Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 4:16 PM

To: Reed, Michael

Cc: Armitage, Julie

Subject: Veolia SOB

On February 26, 2007, the Illinois EPA referred Veolia to the Illinois Attorney General for violations 

of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, Illinois Pollution Control Board Regulations, and the 

HWC MACT. On March 5, 2010, after receiving additional information, the Illinois EPA referred 

additional violations of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, Illinois Pollution Control Board 

Regulations, and the HWC MACT.

My suggested language above. Unfortunately, I need to leave as I have to pick up my car at the 

shop. I will monitor my email from home over weekend /Monday should additional tweaks be 

necessary.

Christopher Pressnall

Assistant Counsel

Illinois EPA

(217) 782-5544

chris.pressnall@illinois.gov

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE:

This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal privilege . If you are 

not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or 
any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify me immediately

by returning it to the sender and delete this copy from your system . Thank you for your cooperation.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the financial
statements and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial 
statements. 
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                    0
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                       598,110 
<ALLOWANCES>                              0 
<INVENTORY>                       4,320,612 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  4,948,629 
<PP&E>                            1,943,249 
<DEPRECIATION>                      508,210 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    6,426,871 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             4,858,583 
<BONDS>                                   0 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0 
<PREFERRED>                             500 
<COMMON>                                400
<OTHER-SE>                        1,558,388 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      6,426,871 
<SALES>                           3,787,854 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  3,787,854 
<CGS>                             4,359,148 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     4,359,148 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   12,622 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  (1,111,182)
<INCOME-TAX>                          3,600 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              (1,114,782)
<DISCONTINUED>                            0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0 
<CHANGES>                                 0 
<NET-INCOME>                     (1,114,782)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                          (.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                          (.28)
        


</TABLE>
#### §§ 219.141-219.148 [Reserved]
### §300d–21. Technical assistance and provision by Secretary of supplies and services in lieu of grant funds

#### (a) Technical assistance

The Secretary shall, without charge to a State receiving payments under section 300d–11(a) of this title, provide to the State (or to any public or nonprofit private entity designated by the State) technical assistance with respect to the planning, development, and operation of any program carried out pursuant to section 300d–11(b) of this title. The Secretary may provide such technical assistance directly, through contract, or through grants.

#### (b) Provision by Secretary of supplies and services in lieu of grant funds

#### (1) In general

Upon the request of a State receiving payments under section 300d–11(a) of this title, the Secretary may, subject to paragraph (2), provide supplies, equipment, and services for the purpose of aiding the State in carrying out section 300d–11(b) of this title and, for such purpose, may detail to the State any officer or employee of the Department of Health and Human Services.

#### (2) Reduction in payments

With respect to a request described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall reduce the amount of payments to the State under section 300d–11(a) of this title by an amount equal to the costs of detailing personnel and the fair market value of any supplies, equipment, or services provided by the Secretary. The Secretary shall, for the payment of expenses incurred in complying with such request, expend the amounts withheld.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XII, §1221, as added Pub. L. 101–590, §3, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 2926.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 300d–21, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XII, §1221, as added Oct. 21, 1976, Pub. L. 94–573, §14(3), 90 Stat. 2718; amended Dec. 12, 1979, Pub. L. 96–142, title I, §107(a)–(c), 93 Stat. 1069, related to programs for burn, trauma, and poison injuries, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 97–35, title IX, §902(d)(1), (h), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 560, 561, effective Oct. 1, 1981.
SI

Case 3:08-cv-02827-SI Document 21 Filed 05/06/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 3:08-cv-02827-SI Document 21 Filed 05/06/15 Page 2 of 3
5/5/15

Case 3:08-cv-02827-SI Document 21 Filed 05/06/15 Page 3 of 3
### Sei-ved : Januar y 17 , 201 2

U S DEPARTN4EN

T OFTRANSPORTATIO N OFFIC E OFHEARING S WASFflNGTON , D C '^^'^^ ^^ ^ I > !- ' 2" : L^ O
APPLICATIO N O F SU N QUES T EXECUTIV E AI RCHARTER , INC
. Fo r fee s an dexpense s under

th e Equa l Acces s t o Justic e Act FDM S NO
. FAA-2011-129 4
NOTIC E O FASSIGNMEN T O FPROCEEDIN G Thi s proceedin g ha s bee n assigne dt o Administrativ e La w Judg e Richar dC
. Goodwin
. All futur e pleading s an dothe r

communication s regardin g thi s proceedin g shal l b e serve do n th e Judge , th e FAA Hearin g Docket , an dth e other

person s o

n th e attache dServic e List
.

.—- ,


### """Ronnie A
. Yoder

^ Chie f Administrativ e La

w Ju d Attachment

- Servic e Lis tFDMSNo
. FAA-2011-129 4 (Equa i Acces s t o Justic e Act ) SERVIC E LIS T ORIGINA L & ON E COP Y Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W
. Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-430 , Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit e 2W1000 '

ON E COP Y Christin aMerrick , Respondent' s Counse l La w Offic e o f

Arthu r Wasscmia n 1638 0 Rosco e Blvd. , Suite 12 0 VanNuys , CA91406-I22 I TEL : 818-895-823 4 FAX : 81 8 895-067 5 Josep h A
. Contc Manager , Air

andOperation s Law Enforcement

Division , AGC-30 0 Offic e o f th e Chie f Counse l Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Washington , DC 2059 1 TEL ; 202-267-715 8 FAX : 202-267-510 6 Naom i Tsuda , Complainant' s Counse l Attorney , Offic e o f

Regional Counse l Western-Pacifi c Region , AWP- 7 Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n P.O
. Bo x 9200 7 Lo s Angeles
. C A 90009-200 7 - • TEL : 310-725-710 1 FAX : 310-725-681 6 Th e Honorabl e RichardC
. Goodwin , Administrativ e La w Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S
. Department

o f Transportatio n 1200 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E
. Washington , D C 2059 0 TEL : Attorney-Adviso r

202-366-213 9 Lega l Assistan t

202-366-512 1 FAX : 202-366-753 6 Servic e wa s b y U.S
. Mail
. Fo

r ser\'ic e i n perso n o r b y expeditedcourier , us e (li

e followin g address : Federa

l Avialio n Administralion , 600 Independence Avenue , S.W. , Wilbu r Wrigh l Building—Suit

e 2W1000 , Washington , D C 20591 ; AllenUon : Hearing Docke t Clerk, AGC-430
.

-2 -
#### §§ 1600.112-1600.129 [Reserved]
#### Daquasia Payne et al., Appellants, v State of New York et al., Respondents.

[833 NYS2d 85]

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered June 6, 2006, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ cross motion pursuant to CPLR *2913211, and dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The complaint, which is devoid of allegations of systemic, district-wide educational deficiencies attributable to a lack of funding by the State, fails to state a cognizable claim under the Education Article (art XI, § 1) of the New York State Constitution *(see New York Civ. Liberties Union v State of New York, 4*NY3d 175, 180-182 [2005]; *Paynter v State of New York,*100 NY2d 434, 440-441 [2003]; *Campaign for Fiscal Equity v State of New York,*86 NY2d 307, 317-319 [1995] *(CFE II]).*In any event, plaintiffs claims are barred by res judicata based upon the recently concluded litigation in *Campaign for Fiscal Equity, Inc. v State of New York*(8 NY3d 14 [2006]). It is clear that the CFE plaintiffs represented the interests of all New York City school children and that the relief obtained—a declaratory judgment that the State was inadequately funding the New York City public school system and an order directing the State to implement financing reforms to fund the City public school system adequately *(see Campaign for Fiscal Equity v State of New York,*100 NY2d 893 [2003] and 8 NY3d 14 [2006], *supra)—*was for the benefit of all City school children, including plaintiffs *(see Buechel v Bain,*97 NY2d 295, 304 [2001], *cert denied*535 US 1096 [2002]; *Green v Santa Fe Indus.,*70 NY2d 244, 253 [1987]; *Weisz v Levitt,*59 AD2d 1002 [1977]; *Stissing Natl. Bank v Kaplan,*28 AD2d 1159 [1967]).

Plaintiffs’ remaining arguments are unavailing. Concur— Tom, J.P., Marlow, Nardelli, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.
§ 306.2 Policy. ( a ) In the recruitment, selection, placement, service, and termination of Peace Corps Trainees and Volunteers, it is the policy of the Peace Corps to provide equal opportunity for all persons and to prohibit discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 or over), disability, and other bases provided for in applicable statutes, regulations or the Peace Corps Manual, or history of participation in the Peace Corps discrimination complaint process.
( b ) It is the policy of the Peace Corps, upon a determination that such prohibited discrimination has occurred, to take appropriate corrective action to remedy the discrimination and to prevent its recurrence.
( c ) It is the policy of the Peace Corps that all agency staff must cooperate in the investigation of a complaint. Volunteers and trainees are strongly encouraged to cooperate.
### §3796dd–6. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3796dd–6 was editorially reclassified as section 10387 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
§ 312.505 How are violations of this part determined for recipients who are individuals? An individual recipient is in violation of the requirements of this part if the Peace Corps Director or designee determines, in writing, that— ( a ) The recipient has violated the requirements of subpart C of this part; or
( b ) The recipient is convicted of a criminal drug offense resulting from a violation occurring during the conduct of any award activity.
#### Morton Haber, Petitioner, v Town of Ramapo et al., Respondents.

Proceeding by a Town of Ramapo police officer pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Police Commissioners of the Town of Ramapo, dated August 23, 1976, which, after a hearing, found petitioner guilty of the specification that he had failed to interview a complainant in the course of a police assignment, and imposed a suspension without pay for a period of seven days. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements. There was substantial evidence to support the finding and the punishment was not unduly severe (see *Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222). Shapiro, J. P., Cohalan, Margett and Hawkins, JJ., concur.
+--+.

CARBON

SWEETWATE R

Pathfinder
Reservoir

Seminoe
Reservoir

Wildlife Habitat Management Area || Management Area

1 Upper Muddy Creek Watershed/Grizzly 4

2 Pennock Mountain 5
6
|| Research Area 7

3 Stratton Sagebrush Steppe

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM

JO Ranch Site
High Savery Dam
Pennock Mountain

Shirley Mountain Bat Cave Area

Medicine Bow

°

10 20 40 60 80 100

Miles

Map 2-11
Other Special Management Areas
Alternative 2
#### Ernest Buff-Merz v. Gustave Ratkowsky, etc.

Application denied, with ten dollars costs, and stay vacated. Order signed. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Smith, Page and Greenbaum, JJ.
#### Ruth A. Tuttle, Appellant, v. W. T. Grant Company, Respondent.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. (Appeal from judgment of Ontario Trial Term for defendant for no cause of action, in an action for damages for breach of implied covenant in a lease. The order denied a motion for a new trial.) Present ■ — • Williams, P. J., Bastow, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
#### Joseph E. Thoren, appellee, v. William B. Walrath, appellant.

Gen. No. 27,660.

Action for a balance due on the purchase price of real estate contracts sold to defendant. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joel C. Pitch, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1922.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed October 30, 1922.

Rehearing denied November 13, 1922.

King, Brower & Hurlbut, for appellant. Gurdon Williams, for appellee.

Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.
§ 521.39 Appeal to the Broadcasting Board of Governors Director. ( a ) Any defendant who has filed a timely answer and who is determined in an initial decision to be liable for a civil penalty or assessment may appeal such decision to the Broadcasting Board of Governors Director by filing a notice of appeal with the Broadcasting Board of Governors Director in accordance with this section.
( b ) ( 1 ) No notice of appeal may be filed until the time period for filing a motion for reconsideration under § 521.38 has expired.
( 2 ) If a motion for reconsideration is timely filed, a notice of appeal may be filed within 30 days after the ALJ denies the motion or issues a revised initial decision, whichever applies.
( 3 ) If no motion for reconsideration is timely filed, a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the ALJ issues the initial decision.
( 4 ) The Director may extend the initial 30-day period for an additional 30 days if the defendant files with the Director a request for an extension within the initial 30-day period and shows good cause.
( c ) If the defendant files a timely notice of appeal with the Director, and the time for filing motions for reconsideration under § 521.38 has expired, the ALJ shall forward the record of the proceeding to the Director.
( d ) A notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a written brief specifying exceptions to the initial decisions and reasons supporting the exceptions.
( e ) The representative for the Government may file a brief in opposition to exceptions within 30 days of receiving the notice of appeal and accompanying brief.
( f ) There is no right to appear personally before the Director.
( g ) There is no right to appeal any interlocutory ruling by the ALJ.
( h ) In reviewing the initial decision, the Director shall not consider any objection that was not raised before the ALJ unless a demonstration is made of extraordinary circumstances causing the failure to raise the objection.
( i ) If any party demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Director that additional evidence not presented at such hearing is material and that there were reasonable grounds for the failure to present such evidence at such hearing, the Director shall remand the matter to the ALJ for consideration of such additional evidence.
( j ) The Director may affirm, reduce, reverse, compromise, remand, or settle any penalty or assessment determined by the ALJ in an initial decision.
( k ) The Director shall promptly serve each party to the appeal with a copy of her/his decision and a statement describing the right of any person determined to be liable for a penalty or assessment to seek judicial review.
( l ) Unless a petition for review is filed as provided in 31 U.S.C. 3805 after a defendant has exhausted all administrative remedies under this part and within 60 days after the date on which the Director serves the defendant with a copy of her/his decision, a determination that a defendant is liable under § 521.3 is final and is not subject to judicial review.
#### § 233.10 Payment to USAID of excess amounts received by a Noteholder.

If a Noteholder shall, as a result of USAID paying compensation under this Guarantee, receive an excess payment, it shall refund the excess to USAID.
### §5416. Consumer's manual; contents

The Secretary shall develop guidelines for a consumer's manual to be provided to manufactured home purchasers by the manufacturer. These manuals should identify and explain the purchasers' responsibilities for operation, maintenance, and repair of their manufactured homes.

(Pub. L. 93–383, title VI, §617, Aug. 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 711; Pub. L. 96–399, title III, §308(c)(4), Oct. 8, 1980, 94 Stat. 1641; Pub. L. 97–35, title III, §339B(c), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 417.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

References to "mobile homes", wherever appearing in text, changed to "manufactured homes" in view of the amendment of title VI of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (this chapter) by section 308(c)(4) of Pub. L. 96–399 requiring the substitution of "manufactured home" for "mobile home" wherever appearing in title VI of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, and section 339B(c) of Pub. L. 97–35 (set out as a note under section 1703 of Title 12, Banks and Banking) providing that the terms "mobile home" and "manufactured home" shall be deemed to include the terms "mobile homes" and "manufactured homes", respectively.

#### Amendments

1980—Pub. L. 96–399 substituted "manufactured home" for "mobile home".

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective upon the expiration of 180 days following Aug. 22, 1974, see section 627 of Pub. L. 93–383, set out as a note under section 5401 of this title.
Case 3:08-cv-03757-JL Document 31 Filed 01/22/10 Page 1 of 3 Case3:08-cv-03757-JL Document30 Filed01/22/10 Page1 of 3
Case 3:08-cv-03757-JL Document 31 Filed 01/22/10 Page 2 of 3 Case3:08-cv-03757-JL Document30 Filed01/22/10 Page2 of 3
Case 3:08-cv-03757-JL Document 31 Filed 01/22/10 Page 3 of 3 Case3:08-cv-03757-JL Document30 Filed01/22/10 Page3 of 3
### §3793. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3793 was editorially reclassified as section 10261 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 3793, Pub. L. 90–351, title I, §653, as added Pub. L. 91–644, title I, §10, Jan. 2, 1971, 84 Stat. 1889; amended Pub. L. 93–83, §2, Aug. 6, 1973, 87 Stat. 218, subjected the operation of the law enforcement and criminal justice program under this chapter to section 371 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, prior to the general amendment of title I of Pub. L. 90–351 by Pub. L. 96–157. See section 10273 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.

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

#### Dissemination of Information

Pub. L. 106–386, div. B, title III, §1302(d), Oct. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1511, which directed the Attorney General to compile and disseminate information regarding certain projects funded under the Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990 and the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, was editorially reclassified and is set out as a note under section 20324 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
### §3796jj–7. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3796jj–7 was editorially reclassified as section 10498 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.