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

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

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

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

JC/Research

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM SANFORD GADD,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 07-16968

D.C. No. 06-cv-00651-RCC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 16, 2010** 

Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

Federal prisoner William Sanford Gadd appeals pro se from the district

court’s denial of the motion he filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

60(b). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we dismiss.

FILED

MAR 02 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
JC/Research 2 07-16968

Gadd contends the district court erred by denying his motion based on

procedural grounds. “[W]here the underlying judgment has been appealed, denial

of a motion for relief from that judgment is a nonappealable order.” Gould v.

Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 790 F.2d 769, 772 (9th Cir. 1986). The proper

procedure to seek Rule 60(b) relief during the pendency of an appeal is to ask the

district court whether it wishes to entertain the motion, or to grant it, and then

move this court, if appropriate, for remand of the case. Scott v. Younger, 739 F.2d

1464, 1466 (9th Cir. 1984). “If that route is not taken, an appeal of the denial of

the [Rule 60(b) motion] is subject to dismissal.” Gould, 790 F.2d at 772. 

In this case, the district court dismissed Gadd’s habeas corpus petition. 

Gadd then filed a notice of appeal. While his appeal was pending, he filed a Rule

60(b) motion in the district court. However, Gadd failed to follow the proper

procedure in seeking to have the district court rule on his Rule 60(b) motion. 

Accordingly, we dismiss Gadd’s appeal. See Scott, 739 F.2d at 1466. 

Finally, we deny Gadd’s request to expand the certificate of appealability to

include his claim that the district court in West Virginia did not have jurisdiction to

indict him. See Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1103-05 (9th Cir. 1999)

(per curiam).

DISMISSED.
#### Silvio Politi v. Irvmar Realty Corp.

Motions for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted to the extent of certifying the following questions: 1. “Was the order of Special Term denying the motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute properly made?” 2. “Was the order of Special Term denying the motion to vacate a stay granted under C. P. A. § 1529 properly made?” Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.
Exhibit No. 32.1
Form 10-KSB
Ozolutions Inc.
File No. 0-31343

          Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted
           Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     In connection  with the Annual Report of Ozolutions Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending  August 31, 2003 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Max Weissengruber,
Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
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: January 16, 2004                    By:   /s/ Max Weissengruber
                                                Chief Executive Officer

          Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted
           Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

     In connection  with the Annual Report of Ozolutions Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending  August 31, 2003 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Douglas Robertson,
Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
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: January 16, 2004                    By:   /s/ Douglas Robertson
                                                Chief Financial Officer

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Ozolutions  Inc.  and will be  retained  by  Ozolutions  Inc.  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 10-Q QUARTER
ENDED JUNE 30, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           3,546
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,279
<ALLOWANCES>                                       181
<INVENTORY>                                      7,727
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,115
<PP&E>                                          25,592
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,382
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  29,972
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,216
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        37,453
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    29,972
<SALES>                                         13,685
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,685
<CGS>                                           10,759
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,866
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    819
<INCOME-TAX>                                        10
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       809
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10
        

</TABLE>
§ 1.2 Public reading rooms. ( a ) Components within the USDA maintain public reading rooms containing the records that the FOIA requires to be made regularly available for public inspection in an electronic format. Each component is responsible for determining which of its records are required to be made publicly available, as well as identifying additional records of interest to the public that are appropriate for public disclosure, and for posting and indexing such records. Each component shall ensure that its reading room and indices are reviewed and updated on an ongoing basis.
( b ) A link to USDA Electronic Reading Rooms can be found on the USDA public FOIA website.
( c ) In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(2), each component within the Department shall make the following materials available for public inspection and copying (unless they are promptly published and copies offered for sale): ( 1 ) Final opinions, including concurring and dissenting opinions, as well as orders, made in the adjudication of cases;
( 2 ) Those statements of policy and interpretation which have been adopted by the agency and are not published in the Federal Register;
( 3 ) Administrative staff manuals and instructions to staff that affect a member of the public;
( 4 ) Copies of all records, regardless of form or format, which have been released to a person pursuant to a FOIA request under 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(3), and have been requested three or more times; and
( 5 ) Copies of all records, regardless of form or format, which have been released to a person pursuant to a FOIA request under 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(3), and which because of the nature of their subject matter, have become or are likely to become the subject of subsequent requests for substantially the same records. Components shall decide on a case by case basis whether records meet these requirements, based on the following factors: ( i ) Previous experience with similar records;
( ii ) The particular characteristics of the records involved, including their nature and the type of information contained in them; and
( iii ) The identity and number of requesters and whether there is widespread media, historical, academic, or commercial interest in the records.
#### 950.7000 Scope of subpart.

This subpart describes the established policies concerning indemnification of Department of Energy (DOE) contractors against public liability for a nuclear incident arising out of or in connection with the contract activity.

[49 FR 12039, Mar. 28, 1984, as amended at 56 FR 57827, Nov. 14, 1991; 74 FR 36368, July 22, 2009]
Order entered February 8 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 12 - 01326 - CV GABRIEL AGUINAGA, ET AL., Appellant s V. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC - 12 - 04400 - B 

### O RDER We DENY appellee’s January 22, 2013 motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. Appellants shall file their brief on or before March 8, 2013. We caution appellants that failure to file their brief on or before March 8, 2013 will result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.8(a)(1).

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
#### 904.7201 Contract clause.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 952.204-75, Public Affairs, in solicitations and contracts that require the contractor to release unclassified information related to efforts under its contract regarding DOE policies, programs, and activities.

[49 FR 11941, Mar. 28, 1984, as amended at 74 FR 36362, July 22, 2009]
#### § 1005.54 Equivalent price.

See § 1000.54.
#### Iris Crump, Plaintiff, v City of New York et al., Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs-Respondents, et al., Third-Party Defendants. A. Cooper Plumber, Inc., et al., Third-Party Defendants-Appellants.

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 28, 1977, denying third-party defendants’ separate motions for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, with one bill of $75 costs and disbursements of this appeal to appellants, and the motions for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint granted. Third-party plaintiffs failed to comply with demands for bills of particulars served by the moving third-party defendants, as a result of which preclusion orders were entered. The preclusion orders were not complied with. The bills would have furnished the particulars of the agreements and acts of negligence performed in relation thereto which are the gravamen of the third-party complaint. The preclusion orders were granted on default. Third-party plaintiffs even defaulted on the motions to dismiss the third-party complaint, the denials of which are the subject of this appeal. The motions should have been granted. (See *Jawitz v British Leyland Motor,*42 AD2d 536.) There is no basis for Special Term’s conclusion that the preclusion orders, although restricting third-party plaintiffs’ case-in-chief, do not man*635date a dismissal of the third-party complaint. Notice of third-party defendants’ respective motions to dismiss was given to all parties. No opposition was offered to the relief sought. In her complaint plaintiff has asserted causes of action in negligence and breach of the lease. The proof offered in support thereof would not supply the proof in support of the third-party complaint. We do not, however, make any determination that as a general policy summary judgment must be granted upon an order of preclusion. (See *Jawitz, supra,*p 537.) Concur — Lupiano, J. P., Silverman, Sandler and Sullivan, JJ.
#### 908.7105 Filing cabinets.

Acquisitions of filing cabinets shall be in accordance with FPMR 41 CFR 101-26.308 and 101-25.302-2 and DOE-PMR 41 CFR 109-25.302.

[49 FR 11945, Mar. 28, 1984; 49 FR 38950, Oct. 2, 1984, as amended at 74 FR 36362, July 22, 2009]
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

# Getting Staff Buy-in for a “Low-Barrier” Approach at a Youth Shelter

The Department of Health and Human Services’ National Clearinghouse on Families and Youth is featuring information on its website for individuals who work in youth shelters who want to help other staff get used to a “low-barrier” approach, meaning young people are not turned away because they have been drinking or using drugs.
#### 5433.214. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).

The contracting officer shall insert the provision in 5452.233 in all solicitations unless the conditions at FAR 33.203(b) apply.

[66 FR 27474, May 17, 2001]
§ 1030.12 Producer. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, *producer* means any person who produces milk approved by a duly constituted regulatory agency for fluid consumption as Grade A milk and whose milk is: ( 1 ) Received at a pool plant directly from the producer or diverted by the plant operator in accordance with § 1030.13; or
( 2 ) Received by a handler described in § 1000.9(c).
( b ) Producer shall not include: ( 1 ) A producer-handler as defined in any Federal order;
( 2 ) A dairy farmer whose milk is received at an exempt plant, excluding producer milk diverted to the exempt plant pursuant to § 1030.13(d);
( 3 ) A dairy farmer whose milk is received by diversion at a pool plant from a handler regulated under another Federal order if the other Federal order designates the dairy farmer as a producer under that order and that milk is allocated by request to a utilization other than Class I; and
( 4 ) A dairy farmer whose milk is reported as diverted to a plant fully regulated under another Federal order with respect to that portion of the milk so diverted that is assigned to Class I under the provisions of such other order.
#### 9.408 [Reserved]
#### 919.7002 Definitions.

*Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)* means an institution determined by the Secretary of Education to meet the requirements of 34 CFR 608.2.

*Other minority institutions of higher learning* means an institution determined by the Secretary of Education to meet the requirements of 20 U.S.C. 1067k.

*Small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans* means a small business concern as defined in Public Law 106-50, Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act of 1999.

*Small disadvantaged business* means a small business concern owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals that meets the requirements of 13 CFR part 124, subpart B.

*Women-owned small business* means a small business concern that meets the requirements of 15 U.S.C. 637(d)(3)(D).
EXHIBIT 31.2


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Carl Ceragno, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Communications Research,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

       a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
          material information relating to the registrant, including its
          consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
          entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report
          is being prepared;

       b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          the annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

       c. Presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
          evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):

       a. All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
          internal controls; and

       b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in the annual
report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: March 30, 2004                          By: /s/ Carl R. Ceragno
                                                  -------------------
                                                  Carl R. Ceragno
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 15

- 00465

- CV

Adolfo R. MARTINEZ

, Appellant

v.

Noel P. BENAVIDES ; Pablo A. Martinez, Inc.; Dr. Javier Tadeo Ramirez; Judith Christina R. Barrera, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Evangelina H. Ramirez; Maria Cecilia R. Benavides, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Evangelina H. Ramirez;

Claud ia R. Mathers; and Leticia R. Reyes

, Appellees

From the 229th Judicial District Court, Starr County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC

- 03

- 350 Honorable Ana Lisa Garza, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance wit h this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the trial court’s order denying the motion for reinstatement is AFFIRMED.

It is ORDERED that Appellees Noel P. Benavides; Pablo A. Martinez, Inc.; Dr. Javier Tadeo Ramirez; Judith Christina R. Barrera, Ind ividually and as Executrix of the Estate of Evangelina H. Ramirez; Maria Cecilia R. Benavides, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Evangelina H. Ramirez; Claudia R. Mathers; and Leticia R. Reyes recover their costs on appeal from Appellant Adolf o R. Martinez.

SIGNED June 1, 2016.

_____________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
               AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
               PURSUANT TO
               18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
               AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
               SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Richard W. Mott, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
the Annual Report of Kyphon Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual
Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial
condition and results of operations of Kyphon Inc.

Date:February 28, 2007

By:/s/ Richard W. Mott     	
   Richard W. Mott
                   President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
   (Principal Executive Officer)



I, Maureen L. Lamb, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Kyphon Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Kyphon Inc.

Date:February 28, 2007

By: /s/ Maureen L. Lamb	
               Maureen L. Lamb
               Vice President, Chief Operating Officer
               (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer)

---