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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: WILLIAM ROBERT NORRIE,

Debtor

.

______________________________

WILLIAM ROBERT NORRIE,

Appellant,

v.

MARK BLISS; et al.,

Appellees. No. 16

- 60092

BAP No. 16

- 1002

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

Kurtz, Kirscher, and Taylor, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding

Submitted July 15, 2019 **

Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Chapter 7 debtor William Robert Norrie appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy

Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s December

* 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

JUL 19 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 16

- 60092

18, 2015 order denying Norrie’s motion for relief under Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 60(b) , and the BAP’s order denying rehearing . We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d)

. We review de novo BAP decisions and apply the same

standard of review that the BAP applied to the bankruptcy court’s ruling. Boyajian

v. New Falls Co rp. (In re Boyajian) , 564 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 2009). We

review for an abuse of discretion the bankruptcy court’s decision regarding

recosideration

. See Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc. , 5 F.3d

1255, 1262 (9th Cir. 1993)

. We a ffirm.

The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying Norrie’s

December 16, 2015 motion because Norrie failed to demonstrate any basis for

relief. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024 (making Rule 60 applicable to bankruptcy

cases); Sch. Dist. No. 1J

, Multnomah Cty., Or. v. ACandS, Inc. , 5 F.3d at 1262

- 63

(9th Cir. 1993) (setting forth standard of review and grounds for relief under Rule

60(b)).

The BAP did not abuse its discretion in denying Norrie ’ s November 8, 2016

motion for reconsideration because Norrie failed to demonstrate any basis for

relief. See Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8022(a)(2) (motion must state with particularity each

point of law or fact that the movant believes the BAP has overlooked or

misapprehended).

We reject as unsupported by the record Norrie’s contention that the3 16

- 60092

bankruptcy court failed to state its reason for denying Norrie’s Rule 60 motion.

Norrie’s motion to file a late reply brief (Docket Entry No. 36) is granted.

The Clerk shall file the reply brief submitted at Docket Entry No. 37

.

All other pending motions and requests, including appellees’ request for

judicial notice contained within Docket Entry No. 6, are denied.

AFFI R MED.
###### Editorial Note on Part 70

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 70 appear at 81 FR 86910, Dec. 2, 2016.

#### § 70.12 Carriers.

Common and contract carriers, freight forwarders, warehousemen, and the U.S. Postal Service are exempt from the regulations in this part to the extent that they transport special nuclear material in the regular course of carriage for another or storage incident thereto. This exemption does not apply to the storage in transit or transport of material by persons covered by the general license issued under § 70.20a and § 70.20b.

[46 FR 12696, Feb. 18, 1981]
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 536 

Expressing condolences to the people and Government of Nigeria for the 

loss of life suffered in the crash of a Nigerian passenger jet on October 

22 and the tragic death of Stella Obasanjo, wife of Nigerian President 

Olusegun Obasanjo, at a hospital in Spain on October 23, 2005. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 4, 2005 

Mr. PAYNE (for himself, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. TANCREDO, Mr. RANGEL, Ms. 

KILPATRICK of Michigan, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Ms. CARSON, Ms. 

CORRINE BROWN of Florida, Mr. TOWNS, Ms. MCCOLLUM of Minnesota, 

Mr. MEEKS of New York, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. WYNN, Mr. 

BUTTERFIELD, Mr. LANTOS, Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. OWENS, 

and Ms. WATERS) submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on International Relations 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing condolences to the people and Government of 

Nigeria for the loss of life suffered in the crash of 

a Nigerian passenger jet on October 22 and the tragic 

death of Stella Obasanjo, wife of Nigerian President 

Olusegun Obasanjo, at a hospital in Spain on October 

23, 2005. 

Whereas on October 22, 2005, a passenger jet en route from 

Lagos to the Nigerian capital of Abuja crashed shortly 

after takeoff; 
2 

•HRES 536 IH 

Whereas all 111 passengers and six crew members of 

Bellview Airlines Flight 210 perished in the crash; 

Whereas the pilot of Bellview Airlines Flight 210 reportedly 

sent a distress call approximately three minutes after 

takeoff; 

Whereas, according to the Nigerian Aviation Minister, the 

crash may have been a result of an explosion onboard the 

aircraft; and 

Whereas on October 23, 2005, Stella Obasanjo, wife of Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, died from complications resulting from surgery at a hospital in Spain: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) expresses condolences to the people and 

3 Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for 

4 the tragic loss of life suffered in the crash of 

5 Bellview Airlines Flight 210 on October 22 and the 

6 tragic death of Stella Obasanjo, wife of Nigerian 

7 President Olusegun Obasanjo, at a hospital in Spain 

8 on October 23, 2005; and 

9 (2) urges the Government of the United States 

10 to provide assistance to the Government of Nigeria 

11 in the investigation to determine the cause and re12 sponsibility of the crash of Bellview Airlines Flight 

13 210. 

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 565 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 565

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     November 18, 2005.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 3058) making 
appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and 
Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes. All 
points of order against the conference report and against its consideration are 
waived. The conference report shall be considered as read.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.1


              CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.ss.1350 AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of AccuPoll
Holding Corp. (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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.

Dated: May 20, 2003

                                                        /s/ Dennis Vadura
                                                        -----------------------
                                                        Dennis Vadura
                                                        Chief Executive Officer


                                                        /s/ Craig A. Hewitt
                                                        -----------------------
                                                        Craig A. Hewitt
                                                        Chief Financial Officer
#### § 603.855 Protected data.

In accordance with law and regulation, the contracting officer must not release or disclose data marked with a restrictive legend (as specified in 603.850) to third parties, unless they are parties authorized by the award agreement or the terms of the legend to receive the data and are subject to a written obligation to treat the data in accordance with the marking.
2007-1968.

#### Treherne v. Timmerman-Cooper.

In Prohibition. On answer of respondents. On S.Ct.Prac.R. X(5) determination, cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 773 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 773

To require the Department of Defense to utilize managed print services.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 31, 2017

   Ms. Meng introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Department of Defense to utilize managed print services.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Department of Defense Managed Print 
Services Utilization Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) On December 5, 2016, Craig Whitlock and Bob Woodward of 
        the Washington Post published an article entitled ``Pentagon 
        Buries Evidence of $125 Billion in Bureaucratic Waste'' 
        (``Article'').
            (2) In this article, Whitlock and Woodward made public the 
        Defense Business Board report ``Transforming DOD's Core 
        Business Processes for Revolutionary Change'' (``Report'').
            (3) Recommendations on page 22 of the report state that a 
        ``move to managed print services'' presents a ``20-30% savings 
        opportunity'' which would save the American taxpayer millions 
        of dollars annually.

SEC. 3. MANAGED PRINT SERVICES.

    The Secretary of Defense shall, to the extent practicable, pursue 
managed print services within the Department of Defense.
                                 <all>
```
226 So.2d 336

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Anthony BLANCHARD.

No. 50115.

Sept. 17, 1969.

In re: Anthony Blanchard applying for writ of habeas corpus.

The trial court is ordered to hold a bail bond hearing to. determine the proper *645amount of bail on a basis other than the showing made in the Court’s return.

HAMLIN, J., is of the opinion that, on the showing made, the application should be denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 631 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 631

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     December 18, 2005.
    Resolved, That it shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of 
Sunday, December 18, 2005, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House 
suspend the rules relating to the following measures:
            (1) The bill (H.R. 1185) to reform the Federal deposit insurance 
        system, and for other purposes.
            (2) A bill to reauthorize the Temporary Assistance for Needy 
        Families block grant program through March 31, 2006, and for other 
        purposes.
            (3) The resolution (H. Res. 545) expressing the sense of the House 
        of Representatives on the arrest of Sanjar Umarov in Uzbekistan.
            (4) The concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 284) expressing the 
        sense of Congress with respect to the 2005 presidential and 
        parliamentary elections in Egypt.
            (5) The bill (H.R. 4501) to amend the Passport Act of June 4, 1920, 
        to authorize the Secretary of State to establish and collect a surcharge 
        to cover the costs of meeting the increased demand for passports as a 
        result of actions taken to comply with section 7209(b) of the 
        Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004.
            (6) The bill (S. 1988) to authorize the transfer of items in the War 
        Reserves Stockpile for Allies, Korea.
            (7) The bill (H.R. 2329) to permit eligibility in certain 
        circumstances for an officer or employee of a foreign government to 
        receive a reward under the Department of State Rewards Program.
            (8) A resolution honoring Helen Sewell on the occasion of her 
        retirement from the House of Representatives and expressing the 
        gratitude of the House for her many years of service.
            (9) The bill (H.R. 797) to amend the Native American Housing 
        Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 and other Acts to improve 
        housing programs for Indians.
            (10) The bill (H.R. 358) to require the Secretary of the Treasury to 
        mint coins in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the desegregation 
        of the Little Rock Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, and for 
        other purposes.
            (11) The resolution (H. Res. 456) expressing support for the 
        memorandum of understanding signed by the Government of the Republic of 
        Indonesia and the Free Aceh Movement on August 15, 2005, to end the 
        conflict in Aceh, a province in Sumatra, Indonesia.
            (12) The concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 275) expressing the 
        sense of Congress regarding the education curriculum in the Kingdom of 
        Saudi Arabia.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
`[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 565 Reported in House (RH)]







                                                 House Calendar No. 125
109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 565

                          [Report No. 109-309]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 3058) making appropriations for the Departments of 
   Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the 
   Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

            November 18 (legislative day, November 17), 2005

  Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, from the Committee on Rules, reported the 
  following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and 
                         ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 3058) making appropriations for the Departments of 
   Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the 
   Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 
3058) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, 
Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of 
Columbia, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 2006, and for other purposes. All points of order against the 
conference report and against its consideration are waived. The 
conference report shall be considered as read.
                                                 House Calendar No. 125

109th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 565

                          [Report No. 109-309]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 3058) making appropriations for the Departments of 
   Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the 
   Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies for the 
     fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

            November 18 (legislative day, November 17), 2005

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
From: Gary Davis [gdavis@endicott.com] 

Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 4:34 PM 

To: Telander, Jeff 

Cc: 'Susan Miller' 

Subject: Small Business Panel

Jeff Telander

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Mail Code: D243-02

109 TW Alexander Drive

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709

 

Dear Jeff,

 

I was an attendee at the March 14 Pre-Panel meeting of SER’s pertaining to the Brick and Structural Clay 

MACT, and do appreciate the time you spent with us in presenting information from EPA, and listening to 

our side of the issue. Needless to say, we have some very serious concerns leading to a new Brick 

MACT. Susan Miller is presenting a letter on behalf of the SER entity which summarizes our concerns 

and recommendations, that we hope you will consider. This is of utmost importance to our small, but vital 

industry.

 

Please know that this company is in full support of the letter Susan is sending to you today. Your 

understanding of our plight and position is vital to our future.

 

Gary S. Davis, VP of Sales

Endicott Clay Products Co

Endicott Tile LLC

Telephone: 402.729.3315

Fax: 402.729.5804
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. Appellant. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ERIC DAVID HOFFERT,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

CHARLES L. RYAN and STATE OF

ARIZONA ATTORNEY GENERAL,

 Respondents - Appellees.

No. 09-17536

D.C. No. 2:08-cv-01268-JWS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

John W. Sedwick, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 17, 2012** 

Before: LEAVY, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Arizona state prisoner Eric David Hoffert appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

FILED

JAN 27 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-17536

Hoffert contends that his due process rights were violated because he was

convicted for conduct not prohibited by Arizona law. Specifically, he contends

that Arizona Revised Statute § 13-1304(A) requires the state to prove that Hoffert

possessed the intent to commit a sexual offense at the time that he initially

restrained the victim or, at the latest, prior to his departure from the state. There is

no convincing evidence that the Arizona Supreme Court would have rejected the

Court of Appeals’ interpretation. See In re Watts, 298 F.3d 1077, 1082 (9th Cir.

2002). Accordingly, the state court’s decision was not contrary to, or an

unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254(d)(1); Fiore v. White, 531 U.S. 225, 228-29 (2001) (per curiam) (due

process clause forbids a state to convict a person of a crime without proving the

elements of that crime beyond a reasonable doubt).

AFFIRMED.
#### In the Matter of Publications Data, Inc., Appellant. Philip Ross, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 10, 1979, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining a determination of the Industrial Commissioner assessing the employer the sum of $11,055.69 as contributions due from the employer for the audit period from January 1, 1975 through December 31, 1977. Appellant is in the business of preparing technical manuals, proposals and reports for defense contractors. In its business appellant utilizes the services of typists, editors and proofreaders, technical writers and artists. The board found that the people utilized in these capacities were employees and not independent contractors and assessed appellant for contributions. This appeal ensued. No single factor alone is conclusive in determining whether an employer-employee relationship exists and each case must be decided on its peculiar facts *(Matter of Bull [Ross],*71 AD2d 769; *Matter of Smith [Catherwood],*26 AD2d 459). The question of whether an employment relationship exists is one of fact and the board’s determination must be upheld if there is substantial evidence to support it *(Matter of Rand Light. Corp. [Ross],*69 AD2d 946). In the present case, the record reveals that some of the people who worked in the categories in question had previously performed substantially the same service for appellant on a salary basis; that the work was co-ordinated by appellant’s production people; that on occasion the work was done on appellant’s premises; that deadlines had to be met; that subcontracting by the people chosen by appellant was not allowed; and that the people reported to appellant to pick up an assignment and receive general instructions. The record also reveals that, in general, the services in question were required to be performed according to government specifications detailing such items as the type of typing, the layout, and the contents, among others, and appellant reviewed the work to insure that the specification requirements had been fulfilled. Although certain other factors are present which would support a contrary interpretation, we cannot say as a matter of law that the board erred in finding the existence of an employment relationship and, therefore, the decision of the board must be affirmed *(Matter of England*
      *748
      *[Levine],*38 NY2d 829; *Matter of Schlicker [Blake & Sons—Ross], 55*AD2d 789). Decision affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.