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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LEBOHANG MORAKE,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

NANDI MORAKE,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 20

- 55055

D.C. No. 2:19

- cv

- 07374

- MWF

PLA

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California Michael W. Fitzgerald, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 1 6 , 2021 * *

Before: GRABER

, R. NELSON , and HUNSAKER , Circuit Judges.

Lebohang Morake appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his

diversity action alleging state law claims

. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal on the basis of claim preclusion. Stewart

v. U.S. Bancorp , 297 F.3d 953, 956 (9th Cir. 2002). W e affirm.

* 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

MAR 25 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 55055

The district court properly dismissed appellant’s action on the basis of claim

preclusion because the claims involved the same primary right raised in a prior

state court action that resulted in a final judgment on the merits. See San Diego

Police Officers’ Ass’n v. San Diego City Emps.’ Ret. Sys. , 568 F.3d 725, 734 (9th

Cir. 2009) (federal court must follow state’s preclusion rules to determine effect of

a state court judgment; discussing elements of claim preclusion under California

law); Boeken v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.

, 230 P.3d 342

, 348 (Cal. 2010) ( under the

primary rights theory, “a judgment fo r the defendant is a bar to a subsequent action

by the plaintiff based on the same injury to the same right, even though he presents

a different legal ground for relief” ( citation and internal quotation marks omitted) ).

We do not consider matters not speci fically 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).

Appellee ’ s request for an award of costs on appeal, set forth in the

answering brief, is denied without prejudice to re

- filing in compliance with Federal

Rule of Appellate Procedure 39 and Ninth Circuit Rule 39

- 1.

AFFIRMED.
Case: 1:12-cv-05594 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1
Case: 1:12-cv-05594 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/12 Page 2 of 7 PageID #:2
Case: 1:12-cv-05594 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/12 Page 3 of 7 PageID #:3
Case: 1:12-cv-05594 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/12 Page 4 of 7 PageID #:4
Case: 1:12-cv-05594 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/12 Page 5 of 7 PageID #:5
Case: 1:12-cv-05594 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/12 Page 6 of 7 PageID #:6
Case: 1:12-cv-05594 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/17/12 Page 7 of 7 PageID #:7
# C_2019027EN.01000701.xml

| 22.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/7

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

21 January 2019

(2019/C 27/07)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1362 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 124,60 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4659 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88303 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,2515 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1343 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 137,80 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,7438 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,593 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 317,71 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2911 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7110 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,0667 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5889 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5117 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,9134 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6895 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5457 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 285,38 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,7551 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7238 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4268 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 180,62 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6793 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,961 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 75,4270 |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,120 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,2853 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,7800 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 80,9335 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1362

JPY

Japanese yen

124,60

DKK

Danish krone

7,4659

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88303

SEK

Swedish krona

10,2515

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1343

ISK

Iceland króna

137,80

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,7438

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,593

HUF

Hungarian forint

317,71

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2911

RON

Romanian leu

4,7110

TRY

Turkish lira

6,0667

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5889

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5117

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,9134

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6895

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5457

KRW

South Korean won

1 285,38

ZAR

South African rand

15,7551

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7238

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4268

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 180,62

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6793

PHP

Philippine peso

59,961

RUB

Russian rouble

75,4270

THB

Thai baht

36,120

BRL

Brazilian real

4,2853

MXN

Mexican peso

21,7800

INR

Indian rupee

80,9335

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
#### 32.202 General.
# NationalArchives antiRecordsAdministration
, I 

# Office of

# theFederal Register July 16, 2010 

### FAA 800 Independence Avenue, SW Room 915 J, Regulations Division Washington, DC 20591 ATTN' Nancy Molitor, 

### F.AA Liaison Officer for the Federal Register 

### Dear Ms. Molilor: The materiallisied inthe attachment isapproved forin'':;-;JrpoT3ticn by

### reference in 14CFRPan 39. 11m appro;:al iscontingent. upon the final rule cOlltain~g

## aqx la~guag~ change~, which we:~ a~eed upon 

## by our staffs. 1he approval to mcorporate by reference this pu~hcatlOn{s) ISeffective on the effective date ofyanr finalmle. If you wish to enforce some other edition oftbe p'ublication(s) approved, you must: 

### 1. Publish notice of the change inthe Federal Register,

# aL amend the Code ofFederal Regulations; and I 

### 2. Ensure that acopy ofthaI edition is on file at the Office ofthe Federal Register; and 3. Notify me inwriting ofthe change. Sincerely, ~EY Director of the Federal Register 

### Federal Register Attorney:

# -4{.l:5 Attachment

, '" us. mail address: 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 20740:6001 Office location: 800 North Capitol So-eC't,NW, SuHe 700, Wash.ington, IX 20002-4244 !"'ederai R<'gister web sites: bttp:! jwww.archives.gov/federal-rebster I/Ild I1ttp://WWW,gpoilccess.gov / nara

, '.'. ,,'.

### !ncOlporafion byReference DockerNo. FAA-2009-0003; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-251-AD; Amendment 39-16368,- AD 2010-15-02
Airbus A330 and 340 Airbus A330 and 340
Airbus A330 and 340 Airbus A330 and 340 Mandatory Service Revision 1 0311912008 Bulletin A33D-27-3151, including Appendix 1 Mandatory Service Revision 3 0212212010 Bulletin A330-27-3152, including Appendices 1 and 2 Mandatory Service Revision 1 0311912008 Bulletin A340-27-4151, including Appendix 1 Mandatory Service Revision 2 09/2312008 Bulletin A340-27-4152, including Appendices 1 and 2 Airbus A330 and 340 Mandatory Service Revision 2 Bulletin A340-27-5040. including Appendix 1 0912312010 

### Docket No. FAA-2010-0174: Director(l{e Identifier 2009-NM-186-AD; Amendmenl39-16359; AD 2010-14-14
EMBRAER
EMBRAER Section 1, EMBRAER Revision 6 170 Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR) MRB-1621 Service Bulletin 170-36- Revision 1 0004 01/1412010
0311012008 EMBRAER EMBAAER Service Bulletin 170-36· 0011 Service Bulletin 190-36- 0006 Revision 2 I Revision 1 07/19/2007 07/19/2007 EMBRAER Service Bulletin 190-36· Revision 1 01/1412009 0014 I 

### Docket No. FAA-20J 0-067J..Directorate identifier 201 O-NM-142-AD: Amendment 39-16363: AD 2010-14-18 Boeing Commercia! Airplanes

Primed 7/1612010 Alert Service Bulletin 767·54A0101 Revision 5 06/29/2010

Page I ofl
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v. Herbert Shafer et al., Defendants, and John Anzalone, Respondent.

(Same decision and like cause of action as in companion case of *People*v. *Shafer,*19 A D 2d 849.)
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 532 

Designating the week of June 4 through June 10, 2018, as ‘‘Hemp History 

Week’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 5, 2018 

Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. MERKLEY, Mr. PAUL, and Mr. MCCONNELL) 

submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Designating the week of June 4 through June 10, 2018, 

as ‘‘Hemp History Week’’. 

Whereas Hemp History Week will be held from June 4 

through June 10, 2018; 

Whereas the goals of Hemp History Week are to commemorate the historical relevance of industrial hemp in the 

United States and to promote the full growth potential 

of the industrial hemp industry; 

Whereas industrial hemp is an agricultural commodity that 

has been used for centuries to produce many innovative 

industrial and consumer products, including soap, fabric, 

textiles, construction materials, clothing, paper, cosmetics, food, and beverages; 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 532 ATS 

Whereas the global market for hemp is estimated to consist 

of more than 25,000 products; 

Whereas the value of hemp imported into the United States 

for use in the production of other retail products is estimated at approximately $76,000,000 annually; 

Whereas the United States hemp industry estimates that the 

annual market value of hemp retail sales in the United 

States is more than $688,000,000; 

Whereas, despite the legitimate uses of hemp, many agricultural producers of the United States are prohibited under 

current law from growing hemp; 

Whereas, because most hemp cannot be grown legally in the 

United States, raw hemp material and hemp products are 

imported for sale in the United States; 

Whereas the United States is the largest consumer of hemp 

products in the world, but the United States is the only 

major industrialized country that restricts hemp farming; 

and 

Whereas industrial hemp holds great potential to bolster the 

agricultural economy of the United States: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) designates the week of June 4 through June 

3 10, 2018, as ‘‘Hemp History Week’’; 

4 (2) recognizes the historical relevance of indus5 trial hemp; and 

6 (3) recognizes the growing economic potential 

7 of industrial hemp. 

Æ 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with BILLS
# C_2018214EN.01000301.xml

| 19.6.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 214/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 214/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

18 June 2018

(2018/C 214/03)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1613 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 128,27 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4500 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87655 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,2223 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1554 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 125,70 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,4340 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,739 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 323,02 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,2876 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,6658 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 5,4821 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5610 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5307 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,1156 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6712 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5680 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 282,56 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,6275 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,4780 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3795 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 348,90 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6423 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 62,013 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 73,4609 |
| THB | Thai baht | 37,951 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,3472 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 23,9739 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 79,0145 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1613

JPY

Japanese yen

128,27

DKK

Danish krone

7,4500

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87655

SEK

Swedish krona

10,2223

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1554

ISK

Iceland króna

125,70

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,4340

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,739

HUF

Hungarian forint

323,02

PLN

Polish zloty

4,2876

RON

Romanian leu

4,6658

TRY

Turkish lira

5,4821

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5610

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5307

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,1156

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6712

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5680

KRW

South Korean won

1 282,56

ZAR

South African rand

15,6275

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,4780

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3795

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 348,90

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6423

PHP

Philippine peso

62,013

RUB

Russian rouble

73,4609

THB

Thai baht

37,951

BRL

Brazilian real

4,3472

MXN

Mexican peso

23,9739

INR

Indian rupee

79,0145

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
31.204 Application of principles and procedures. ( a ) Costs are allowable to the extent they are reasonable, allocable, and determined to be allowable under 31.201, 31.202, 31.203, and 31.205. These criteria apply to all of the selected items that follow, even if particular guidance is provided for certain items for emphasis or clarity.
( b ) ( 1 ) For the following subcontract types, costs incurred as reimbursements or payments to a subcontractor are allowable to the extent the reimbursements or payments are for costs incurred by the subcontractor that are consistent with this part: ( i ) Cost-reimbursement.
( ii ) Fixed-price incentive.
( iii ) Price redeterminable (*i.e.*, fixed-price contracts with prospective price redetermination and fixed-ceiling-price contracts with retroactive price redetermination).
( 2 ) The requirements of paragraph (b)(1) of this section apply to any tier above the first firm-fixed-price subcontract or fixed-price subcontract with economic price adjustment provisions.
( c ) Costs incurred as payments under firm-fixed-price subcontracts or fixed-price subcontracts with economic price adjustment provisions or modifications thereto, for which subcontract cost analysis was performed are allowable if the price was negotiated in accordance with 31.102.
( d ) Section 31.205 does not cover every element of cost. Failure to include any item of cost does not imply that it is either allowable or unallowable. The determination of allowability shall be based on the principles and standards in this subpart and the treatment of similar or related selected items. When more than one subsection in 31.205 is relevant to a contractor cost, the cost shall be apportioned among the applicable subsections, and the determination of allowability of each portion shall be based on the guidance contained in the applicable subsection. When a cost, to which more than one subsection in 31.205 is relevant, cannot be apportioned, the determination of allowability shall be based on the guidance contained in the subsection that most specifically deals with, or best captures the essential nature of, the cost at issue.
[48 FR 42301, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 53 FR 17858, May 18, 1988; 62 FR 51271, Sept. 30, 1997; 69 FR 34242, June 18, 2004]
- Skip to main content
- About Us
- Contact Us
- FAQs
-  Language Assistance ****   - English
  - español
  - 中文: 繁體版
  - Việt-ngữ
  - 한국어
  - Tagalog
  - Русский

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Education

            - Student Loans
            - Grants
            - Laws
            - Data

|                                        |
|----------------------------------------|
|                                        | PurposeFunding StatusEligibilityLaws, Regs, & GuidanceApplicant InfoResourcesAwardsFAQsPerformanceContacts |  |
| Office of Postsecondary Education Home |
|                                        |

**Program Office:**Student Service

**CFDA Number:** 84.200**Program Type:** Discretionary/Competitive Grants**Also Known As:** GAANN

This program provides fellowships, through academic departments and programs of IHEs, to assist graduate students with excellent records who demonstrate financial need and plan to pursue the highest degree available in their course study at the institution in a field designated as an area of national need.

Grants are awarded to programs and institutions to sustain and enhance the capacity for teaching and research in areas of national need.

----

 

 Printable view

## How Do I Find...

          - Student loans, forgiveness
          - Higher Education Rulemaking
          - College accreditation
          - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
          - FERPA
          - FAFSA
          - 1098, tax forms

More >

## Information About...

          - Elevating Teaching
          - Early Learning
          - Engage Every Student
          - Unlocking Career Success
          - Cybersecurity

 

----

*Our mission*

Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers

Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a Grant

Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website

Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works ClearinghouseOpen Data PlatformCOVID Relief Data

About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy Program

----

          - Notices
          - FOIA
          - Privacy Policy
          - Accessibility
          - Security
          - Information quality
          - Inspector General
          - Whitehouse.gov
          - USA.gov
          - Benefits.gov
          - Regulations.gov
          - vote.gov
EXHIBIT 10.3


                             JOINT FILING AGREEMENT

     In accordance with Rule 13d-1(k) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, the undersigned hereby agree to the joint filing on behalf of
each of them of a statement on Schedule 13D (including amendments thereto) with
respect to the Series A Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share, of At Home
Corporation, and that this Joint Filing Agreement be included as an Exhibit to
such joint filing.

     This Joint Filing Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts,
and each such counterpart shall be an original but all of which, taken
together, shall constitute but one and the same agreement.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned hereby execute this Agreement as of
this 2nd day of May, 2000.

                                         Comcast Corporation


                                         By: /s/ Arthur R. Block
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            Name:  Arthur R. Block
                                            Title: Senior Vice President Law


                                         Comcast Online Communications, Inc.


                                         By: /s/ Arthur R. Block
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            Name:  Arthur R. Block
                                            Title: Senior Vice President Law


                                         Comcast PC Investments Inc.


                                         By: /s/ Abram E. Patlove
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            Name:  Abram E. Patlove
                                            Title: President
#### 305.7002 Applicability.

This subpart applies to all actions funded in whole or in part by the PPHF.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-2222
DAPHNEY MONROE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus COMMISSIONER, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CA-04-231-1-JAB) Submitted: March 31, 2006 Decided: April 26, 2006 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Daphney Monroe, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Beth Burzycki, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Boston, Massachusetts, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Daphney Monroe appeals the district court’s order adopting the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge and affirming the Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income benefits. We must uphold the decision to deny benefits if the decision is supported by substantial evidence and the correct law was applied. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2000); Craig v. Chater , 76 F.3d 585, 589 (4th Cir. 1996). Having thoroughly reviewed the administrative record, we agree with the district court that substantial evidence supports the Commissioner’s final decision. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Monroe v. Commissioner , No. CA-04-231-1-JAB (M.D.N.C. Sept. 28, 2005). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
31.205-38 Selling costs. ( a ) “Selling” is a generic term encompassing all efforts to market the contractor's products or services, some of which are covered specifically in other subsections of 31.205. The costs of any selling efforts other than those addressed in this cost principle are unallowable.
( b ) Selling activity includes the following broad categories: ( 1 ) *Advertising.* Advertising is defined at 31.205-1(b), and advertising costs are subject to the allowability provisions of 31.205-1(d) and (f).
( 2 ) *Corporate image enhancement.* Corporate image enhancement activities, including broadly targeted sales efforts, other than advertising, are included within the definition of public relations at 31.205-1(a), and the costs of such efforts are subject to the allowability provisions at 31.205-1(e) and (f).
( 3 ) *Bid and proposal costs.* Bid and proposal costs are defined at 31.205-18 and are subject to the allowability provisions of that subsection.
( 4 ) *Market planning.* Market planning involves market research and analysis and general management planning concerned with development of the contractor's business. Long-range market planning costs are subject to the allowability provisions of 31.205-12. Other market planning costs are allowable.
( 5 ) *Direct selling.* Direct selling efforts are those acts or actions to induce particular customers to purchase particular products or services of the contractor. Direct selling is characterized by person-to-person contact and includes such efforts as familiarizing a potential customer with the contractor's products or services, conditions of sale, service capabilities, etc. It also includes negotiation, liaison between customer and contractor personnel, technical and consulting efforts, individual demonstrations, and any other efforts having as their purpose the application or adaptation of the contractor's products or services for a particular customer's use. The cost of direct selling efforts is allowable.
( c ) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, sellers' or agents' compensation, fees, commissions, percentages, retainer or brokerage fees, whether or not contingent upon the award of contracts, are allowable only when paid to bona fide employees or established commercial or selling agencies maintained by the contractor for the purpose of securing business.
[68 FR 43872, July 24, 2003]