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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GENE HAZZARD,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

MAYOR LIBBY SCHAAF; CITY OF OAKLAND, a municipal corporation; MIALISA BONTA, former CEO of Oakland Promise; DAVID SILVER, Educational Director in Mayor Schaaf's Office; BARBARA PARKER, City Attorney; COURTNEY RUBY, City Auditor; ED REISKIN, City Administrator; A NDY FREMDER, co

- founder of East Bay College Fund; ROB BONTA, former 18th Assembly District Representative; SABRINA LANDRETH, former City Administrator,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 23

- 15097

D.C. No. 4:22

- cv

- 02921

- JSW

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California Jeffrey S. White, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 12, 2023 * *

* 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

DEC 18 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 23

- 15097

Before: WALLACE, LEE, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges

.

Gene Hazzard appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

his action alleging federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s decision

on whether to permit oral argument. Mahon v. Credit Bureau of Placer County

Inc. , 171 F.3d 1197, 1200 (9th Cir. 1999) . We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling on Hazzard’s requests

for judicial notice and defendants’ motion to dismiss without oral argument. See

Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b) (stating that “ the court may provide for submitting and

determining motions on briefs[] without oral hearings”) ; N.D. Cal. Civ. R. 7

- 1(b)

( stating that “a motion may be det ermined without oral argument”); Morrow v.

Topping , 437 F.2d 1155, 1156 (9th Cir. 1971) ( concluding that district courts may

rule on motions without oral argument) . Although Hazzard cites Federal Rule of

Evidence 201(e), he provides no law to support his contention that this rule

requires oral argument.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in declining supplemental

jurisdiction over Hazzard’s state law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3) (“The

district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a [state

- law]

claim

. . . if

. . . the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original3 23

- 15097

jurisdiction

. . . .”) ; Ove v. Gwinn , 264 F.3d 817, 821 (9th Cir. 2001) ( setting forth

standard of review ).

We reject as unsupported by the record Hazzard’s contentions that the

district court failed to consider the record or failed to address the relevant

allegations raised in the operative complaint.

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

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

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

AFFIRMED.
**UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION**

**Office of the Deputy Secretary**

TO           :   Chief of Staff, Office of the Deputy Secretary

FROM     :   Deputy Secretary, U.S. Office of Education

SUBJECT:   Delegation of Authority to Request Closure/Certification 

I. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

In accordance with the policy and procedures set forth in the Department’s Handbook for the Post Audit Process and my responsibilities as Action Official for the Financial Office under the Department’s ACS Directive OCFO-01, I hereby delegate to you the authority to serve as the Action Official in issuing the Request for Closure/Certification Memorandum.  This delegation of authority covers internal audits defined in this context as ED-OIG and GAO issued audits as well as alternative products issued by ED0-OIG, and tracked by the Department’s automated tracking system.

Unless otherwise noted in future delegations of authority, amendments to the authority cited herein are included within the scope of this delegation.

II. RESERVATIONS

None.

III. REDELEGATION

This authority may not be redelegated.

IV. CERTIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department’s Delegation Control Officer.

_________-signed-_________________

           Tony Miller

Dated Certified:  June 13, 2012

Delegations Control Officer:  Bruce L. Monblatt

Delegation Control Number:  EB/EB/163
### §2254c. Research

There is appropriated, out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2021 and 2022 for the Agricultural Research Service to address gaps in nutrition research at the critical intersections of responsive agriculture, quality food production, and human nutrition and health.

(Pub. L. 116–260, div. N, title VII, §756, Dec. 27, 2020, 134 Stat. 2109; Pub. L. 117–158, §4(c), June 25, 2022, 136 Stat. 1312.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2022—Pub. L. 117–158 substituted "for each of fiscal years 2021 and 2022" for "for fiscal year 2021 and each fiscal year thereafter".
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4424-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2020-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Ohio (FEMA-4424-DR), dated April 8, 2019, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This change occurred on December 28, 2020.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Joseph Cirone, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster. 

This action terminates the appointment of Steven W. Johnson as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor, 

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2020-29290 Filed 1-5-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
### §§343d–1 to 343d–5. Repealed. June 26, 1953, ch. 157, §2, 67 Stat. 86

Section 343d–1, act June 29, 1935, ch. 338, title II, §23, as added June 6, 1945, ch. 175, §1, 59 Stat. 231, authorized further additional appropriations, commencing with the fiscal year ended June 30, 1946 and continuing on an ascending scale until they amounted to $12,500,000 for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1948 and each subsequent fiscal year, further to develop the cooperative agricultural extension system inaugurated under sections 341 to 343, 344 to 346, and 347a to 349 of this title, and provided for their disposition.

Sections 343d–2 and 343d–3, act Oct. 26, 1949, ch. 753, §§1, 2, 63 Stat. 926, extended the provisions of former section 343d–1 of this title to Puerto Rico and for such purposes, authorized additional appropriations on an ascending scale until they should amount to $401,090 annually.

Sections 343d–4 and 343d–5, act Oct. 27, 1949, ch. 768, §§1, 2, 63 Stat. 939, extended the provisions of former sections 343a, 343b, 343c and 343d–1 of this title to Alaska, and, for such purpose, authorized annual appropriations in amounts to be computed on the same basis as computations of appropriations to States, subject to annual estimates as to funds and amounts by the Secretary of Agriculture.

See, generally, sections 341 to 343, 344 to 346, and 347a to 349 of this title.
###### Editorial Note on Subpart 1052.2 of Part 1052

#### Editorial Note:

At 79 FR 15554, Mar. 20, 2014, subpart 1052.2 was added, however, the amendment could not be incorporated due to inaccurate amendatory instruction.

#### 1052.228-70 Insurance requirements.

As prescribed in 1028.310-70 and 1028.311-2, insert a clause substantially as follows: The contracting officer may require additional kinds of insurance (*e.g.,* aircraft public and passenger liability, vessel liability) or higher limits of coverage.

# Insurance (APR 2015)

In accordance with FAR clause 52.228-5, entitled “Insurance—Work on a Government Installation” [or FAR clause 52.228-7 entitled, “*Insurance—Liability to Third Persons”*], insurance of the following kinds and minimum amounts shall be provided and maintained during the period of performance of this contract:

(a) *Worker's compensation and employer's liability.* The Contractor shall, as a minimum, meet the requirements specified at FAR 28.307-2(a).

(b) *General liability.* The Contractor shall, at a minimum, meet the requirements specified at FAR 28.307-2(b).

(c) *Automobile liability.* The Contractor shall, at a minimum, meet the requirements specified at FAR 28.307-2(c).

(End of clause)

[80 FR 11597, Mar. 4, 2015]
### §303. Management expenses paid by State

All the expenses of management, superintendence, and taxes from date of selection of said lands, previous to their sales, and all expenses incurred in the management and disbursement of the moneys which may be received therefrom, shall be paid by the States to which they may belong, out of the treasury of said States, so that the entire proceeds of the sale of said lands shall be applied without any diminution whatever to the purposes in sections 304, 305, 307 and 308 of this title mentioned.

(July 2, 1862, ch. 130, §3, 12 Stat. 504.)
### §2204d. Encouragement of private contracting

#### (a) In general

For the purpose of promoting local job creation and private sector investment in rural communities, the Secretary of Agriculture is encouraged, where appropriate and feasible, to use private enterprise concerns located in rural areas, rather than government employees or government enterprises, to provide commercial activities or products to carry out the purposes of this title.1

#### (b) Plan required

The Secretary shall develop and implement a plan that will result in increasing the use of contracts awarded to private firms by the Department of Agriculture, and maximizing the use of grant, loan, or other financial assistance made for the purpose of rural development to provide the goods and services purchased to carry out the purposes of this title.1

(Pub. L. 101–624, title XXIII, §2394, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4057.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This title, referred to in text, is title XXIII of Pub. L. 101–624, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 3979, known as the Rural Economic Development Act of 1990. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title of 1990 Amendment note set out under section 1921 of this title and Tables.

1 See References in Text note below.
# United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-3676

___________ United States of America, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Lee Otis Hall, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: March 17, 1997 Filed: March 25, 1997

___________ Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________
PER CURIAM. The gover nment appeals the district court's sua sponte grant to Lee Otis Hall of a downward departure below the statutory mandatory minimum, after Hall pleaded guilty to possessing cocaine with intent to distribute, inviolation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We reverse, and remand fo r resentencing. The g overnment declined to move for a downward departure under 1 8 U.S.C. § 3553(e) beca use Hall had rebuffed its invitation to cooperate in the prosecution of his co-conspirators, one of whom was his stepson. Afte r ackn owledging the propriety of the government's decision, however, th e district court sua sponte granted a 19-month dep arture below the statutory mandatory minimum.

### -2- We conclu de the district court had no authority to depart below the mandatory minimum. N either the court nor Hall suggest that Hall provided substantial assistance warranting departure under section 3553(e). Cf . United Sta tes v. Polanco , 53 F.3d 893, 897 (8th Cir. 1996) (reversin g district court's downward departure below five-year mandatory minimum wher e government had not filed section 3553(e) motion and failure to do so was neither arbitrary, in bad faith, nor unconstitut ional). Likewise, as Hall had at le ast two criminal history points, the district court had n o authority under section 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) to g rant a downward departure. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) (sentencing court may depart below mandator y minimum if defendant does not have more than one criminal history point). Accor dingly, we reverse the district court and remand fo r resentencing. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
11.602 General. ( a ) Under Title I of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2061, *et seq.*), the President is authorized to require preferential acceptance and performance of contracts and orders supporting certain approved national defense and energy programs and to allocate materials, services, and facilities in such a manner as to promote these approved programs.
( b ) The President delegated the priorities and allocations authorities of the Defense Production Act in Executive Order 12919. As part of that delegation, the President designated the Secretary of Commerce to administer the DPAS. For more information, check the DPAS website at:*https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/other-areas/strategic-industries-and-economic-security-sies/defense-priorities-a-allocations-system-program-dpas*
[73 FR 21784, Apr. 22, 2008, as amended at 89 FR 61338, July 30, 2024]
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C.  SECTION 1350**

 

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Quixote Corporation (the “Company”) onForm 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission as of the date hereof (the “Report”), each of theofficers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, tosuch officer’s knowledge:

 

1.                                       The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of thedates and for the periods expressed in the Report.

 

 
| Date:   November 8, 2004 |   | /s/  LESLIE J. JEZUIT                      |   |
|------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|                               |   | Leslie  J. Jezuit, Chief Executive Officer |
|                               |   |                                       |
| Date:   November 8, 2004 |   | /s/  DANIEL P. GOREY                       |   |
|                               |   | Daniel  P. Gorey, Chief Financial Officer  |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnishedsolely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of theReport or as a separate disclosure.

 

1

----
Termination Agreement



 Exhibit 10.1 
 March 29, 2006 
 VIA EMAIL & CERTIFIED MAIL 
 Central Pacific Bank, a Hawaii corporation 

P.O. Box 3590 
 Honolulu, Hawaii 96811-3590 
  

			
	Attn:	  	Robert Kamemoto
		  	Senior Vice President, Commercial Underwriting

 Dear Mr. Kamemoto: 
 Pursuant to the Loan Agreement dated June 9, 2005, by and between Hoku Scientific, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Borrower”), and Central Pacific Bank,
a Hawaii corporation (the “Lender”) for the principal amount of $3,500,000 (the “Loan Agreement”), and the various Loan Documents (as defined in the Loan Agreement), Borrower is hereby giving notice to Lender of Borrower’s
intent to terminate the Loan Agreement and the Loan Documents. 
 To date, Borrower has not received any loan amount from Lender; and, therefore no principal
or any unpaid interest is outstanding under the Loan Documents. In addition, there has been no occurrence of any Event of Default (as defined in the Loan Agreement). To date, Borrower has made the following payments to Lender: 
  

					
	 Description
	  	Amount	 
	 Equity Contribution
	  	$	100,000.00	 
	 CPB Legal Fees to KDUB&M
	  	 	3,567.42	 
	 CPB Inspection Fee
	  	 	500.00	 
	 Return of contribution (8/12/05)
	  	 	(100,000.00	)
		  	 	 	 
	 TOTAL
	  	$	4,067.42	 
		  	 	 	 

 This letter serves as written notice of Borrower’s intent to terminate the Loan Agreement and the Loan
Documents; and Borrower’s request for the release of the Collateral (as defined in the Security Agreement dated June 9, 2005 by and between Lender and Borrower, the “Security Agreement”) from the security interest created in the
Security Agreement. 
 Please sign below to acknowledge the Lender’s agreement that the Loan Agreement is terminated and that the Collateral is released
from the security interest created in the Security Agreement. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. 
 Sincerely yours, 
  

	
	 /s/ Darryl Nakamoto

	Darryl Nakamoto
	Chief Financial Officer

 Acknowledged & agreed on March 29, 2006 
  

			
	CENTRAL PACIFIC BANK
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Robert Kamemoto

	Name:	 	Robert Kamemoto
	Title:	 	Senior Vice President
<PAGE>

                                                               Exhibit 12.(a)(1)

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                  AS ENACTED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Ricoh Company, Ltd. (the
"Company") for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Masamitsu Sakurai,
President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, that:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) 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.

Date:  June 30, 2003

                                       By: /s/ Masamitsu Sakurai
                                          ------------------------------------
                                          Masamitsu Sakurai
                                          President, Chief Executive Officer
                                          and Chief Operating Officer
Order filed, August 29, 2013.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00416

- CR

____________ CLAIRE A. WOLF , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial C ourt Cause No. 1354683



### ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due July 09, 2013

. See Tex. R. App.
P. 35.1. On July 17, 2013 , this court ordered the court reporter to file the record within 30 days. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Myrna Hargis , the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order

. No further extension will beentertaine d absent exceptional circumstances. The trial and appellate courts are

jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). If Myrna Hargis does not timely file the record as ordered, we
will issue an order directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the
reason for the failure to file the record.

PER CURIAM
### §2104. Finding and issuance of orders

After notice and opportunity for hearing as provided in section 2103 of this title, the Secretary shall issue an order if he finds, and sets forth in such order, upon the evidence introduced at such hearing, that the issuance of such order and all the terms and conditions thereof will tend to effectuate the declared policy of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 89–502, §5, July 13, 1966, 80 Stat. 280.)