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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TENZEE LAMA-SHERPA, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 14-71198 

Agency No. A200-941-944 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted July 11, 2017

San Francisco, California

Before: BEA and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and LYNN,** Chief District Judge.

The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denied Petitioner Tenzee LamaSherpa’s motion to reopen immigration proceedings. Lama-Sherpa petitions this 

Court for review of the denial by the BIA, which held that Lama-Sherpa did not 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The Honorable Barbara M. G. Lynn, Chief United States District 

Judge for the Northern District of Texas, sitting by designation.

FILED

SEP 7 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

satisfy his burden to show the new evidence would likely change the result in his

case. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition. 

We review the BIA’s decision to deny a motion to reopen for abuse of 

discretion. Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 601 (9th Cir. 2006). This Court 

defers to the BIA’s decision to deny reopening unless it is “arbitrary, irrational, or 

contrary to law.” Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008). Aliens 

who seek to reopen proceedings “bear a ‘heavy burden’ of proving that if 

proceedings were reopened, the new evidence would likely change the result.” 

Young Sun Shin v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1019, 1025 (9th Cir. 2008). 

Lama-Sherpa argues an attack on his father by the Maoists is evidence of 

changed country conditions in Nepal that would lead to a different result in his

case. However, “an individual who can relocate safely within his home country 

ordinarily cannot qualify for asylum.” Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 

995, 999 (9th Cir. 2003) (quoting INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 18 (2002)). The 

threats made against Lama-Sherpa and the physical violence against his father 

occurred in the city of Jiri. Lama-Sherpa left Jiri for Kathmandu, where no 

violence or threat of violence was made against him. Lama-Sherpa’s parents also 

moved to and lived in Kathmandu for more than seven years, and they faced no 

violence or threat of violence there. 
3 

Lama-Sherpa provides no evidence that he could not reside unharmed in 

Kathmandu or elsewhere in Nepal, other than Jiri. There is also no evidence 

showing a material change in conditions in Nepal since the Immigration Judge’s 

decision. Therefore, Lama-Sherpa did not meet his burden of proof that the new 

evidence would change the result in his case, a necessary prerequisite to reopening.

PETITION DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                      26,700,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               22,400,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 43,700,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            95,900,000
<PP&E>                                   1,192,000,000
<DEPRECIATION>                            (856,000,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             446,300,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      134,000,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  1,800,000
<COMMON>                                       900,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 (58,400,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               446,300,000
<SALES>                                     55,900,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            55,900,000
<CGS>                                       40,700,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               60,000,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          (1,500,000)<F1>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (5,300,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                (1,200,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (6,500,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (6,500,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.09)
<FN>
<F1>(1) net of interest income of $1.3 million
</FN>



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         585,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,719,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (281,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,272,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,562,000
<PP&E>                                       6,067,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               (943,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,126,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,104,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    21,490,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,126,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,768,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,039,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              82,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (801,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (801,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 161,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (640,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        

</TABLE>
#### Carl Gerr *v.*Yale University

King, C. J., Alcorn, House, Thim and Ryan, Js.

Argued October 9

decided November 8, 1968

*Donald F. Keefe,*for the appellant (defendant).

*Mitchel W. Garber,*for the appellee (plaintiff).

Per Curiam.

The defendant has appealed from a judgment rendered on a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, assigning as error the denial of its motion to set aside the verdict on the ground that it is contrary to law and not supported by the evidence. The plaintiff has filed no appendix to his brief to support the verdict. The appeal is sustained on the authority of *Teitelman*v. *Bloomstein,*155 Conn. 653, 656, 236 A.2d 900.

There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case is remanded with direction to grant the motion to set the verdict aside.
# C_2015279EN.01005301.xml

| 24.8.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/53

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 14 July 2015 — Roda v Commission

(Case F-109/14) (1)

((Civil Service - Remuneration - Survivor’s pension - Article 27 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - Right of the divorced spouse of the deceased official - Alimony paid by the deceased official - Capping of the survivor’s pension - Action manifestly unfounded))

(2015/C 279/66)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Silvana Roda (Ispra, Italy) (represented by: L. Ribolzi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision not to increase the amount of the survivor’s pension of which the applicant, who is the ex-spouse of a deceased official, is the beneficiary.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly unfounded. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly unfounded.

| 2. | Orders Ms Roda to bear her own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ms Roda to bear her own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 7, 12.1.15, p. 54.

---
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-1065

HIGHMARK, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ALLCARE HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant.

Cynthia E. Kernick , Reed Smith LLP, of Pittsbur gh, Pennsylvania, argued for

plaintiff-appellee. With her on the brief were James C. Martin

, Kevin S. Katona , and

Richard T. Ting

.

Steven G. Hill , Hill, Kertscher & Wharton, LLP, of Atlanta, Georgia, argued for

defendant-appellant. With him on the brief was Joseph F. Cleveland, Jr. , Brackett &

Ellis, P.C., of Fort Worth, Texas.

Appealed from: United States District C ourt for the Northern District of Texas

Judge Terry MeansNOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-1065

HIGHMARK, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ALLCARE HEALTH MANAGE MENT SYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant.



## Judgment

ON APPEAL from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

in CASE NO(S). 4:03-CV-1384

This CAUSE having been hear d and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Per Curiam (MICHEL, Chief Judge , NEWMAN, and DYK, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

DATED July 13, 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
Denied and Opinion Filed July 20 , 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05
- 21
- 00590
- CV IN RE JONATHAN RUTE , Relator Original Proceeding from the 296th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 296
- 03470
- 2016 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Reichek, and Smith Opinion by Justice Smith In his July 15, 2021 amended petition for writ of mandamus and request for emergency relief , relator contends that the trial court abused its discretion by (1) concluding that he waived his privileges and privacy rights regarding certain emails; and (2) ordering in camera review of those emails. Entitlement to mandamus relief requires relator to show that the trial court clearly abuse d its discretion and that he lacks an adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co ., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135

– 36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding).– 2

–

Based on our review of the petition and record, we conclude that relator has failed to show his entitlement to the relief requested. Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus , and deny the request for emergency relief as moot.

210590f.p05 / Craig Smith / CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE
# C_2014448EN.01001501.xml

| 15.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 448/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 448/15

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen (Sweden) lodged on 20 October 2014 — Canadian Oil Company Sweden AB, Anders Rantén v Riksåklagaren

(Case C-472/14)

(2014/C 448/19)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Referring court

Högsta domstolen

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Canadian Oil Company Sweden AB, Anders Rantén

Applicants:

Defendant: Riksåklagaren

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1) | Does it run counter to REACH (1) that a person who, in the course of a business, imports a chemical product into Sweden — in respect of which there is an obligation to notify under REACH — must notify it in accordance with the Swedish legislation to the Kemikalieinspektionen for registration in the Swedish product register? |
| --- | --- |

1)

Does it run counter to REACH (1) that a person who, in the course of a business, imports a chemical product into Sweden — in respect of which there is an obligation to notify under REACH — must notify it in accordance with the Swedish legislation to the Kemikalieinspektionen for registration in the Swedish product register?

1

| 2) | If the answer to question 1 is negative, does the Swedish obligation to notify run counter to Article 34 TFEU, having regard to the exceptions in Article 36 TFEU? |
| --- | --- |

2)

If the answer to question 1 is negative, does the Swedish obligation to notify run counter to Article 34 TFEU, having regard to the exceptions in Article 36 TFEU?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1).

1

---
Exhibit 32.1

STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Form 10-Q of Hilb Rogal & Hobbs Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, I, Martin L. Vaughan, III, Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer of Hilb Rogal & Hobbs Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

(a) such Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and

(b) the information contained in such Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 fairly presents, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of Hilb Rogal & Hobbs Company and its subsidiaries as of and for the periods presented in such Form 10-Q.



|    |  |                                                             |  |  |  |       |  |            
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ----- |  | -----------
|    |  |                                                             |  | 
|By: |  | /s/  Martin L. Vaughan, III                                 |  |  |  | Date: |  | May 4, 2007
|    |  |                                                             |  |  |  |       |  |            
|    |  | Martin L. Vaughan, III Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  |       |  |
March 27, 2014

United States Environmental Protection Agency — Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733 Attention: Wren Stenger, Director of Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division RE: Freeport LNG Liquefaction Project — Permit No. PSD-TX-1302-GHG; Request for Transfer of Permit Application to TCEQ Dear Mr. Stenger, Freeport LNG Development has received your letter, dated March 27, 2014, requesting us to state our intentions to either proceed with EPA as our greenhouse gas (GHG) permitting authority or request a transfer of our pending GHG prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permit to TCEQ. Freeport LNG Development hereby selects to designate the TCEQ as our GHG PSD permitting authority and requests that our GHG PSD permit application for our Pretreatment and Liquefaction Plant (Permit No. PSD-TX-1302-GHG), and all relevant materials related thereto, be transferred to TCEQ for final processing and issuance. Freeport LNG Development would greatly appreciate EPA's close collaboration with TCEQ in this transition process. If there is any assistance we can provide during this transition period, we are happy to help. Freeport LNG Development recognizes that TCEQ has not yet been fully and fmally vested with the authority to issue GHG PSD permits. In the unlikely event that EPA fails to timely finalize its approval of the SIP or rescind the FIP, however, Freeport LNG Development would expect to re-engage EPA in order to obtain the necessary GHG PSD permit for its planned facility. In closing, Freeport LNG Development would like to talce this opportunity to thank the EPA for its assistance through the GHG permitting process to date, including the time and effort taken by EPA staff inembers Aimee Wilson and Jeff Robinson. EPA staff has been responsive and professional in their efforts on our permit application. If you have any questions regarding this transition request, please contact me at your convenience at 713-333-4271 or by email at mmallett@freeporting.com

. Sincerely,

MarkW. M lett,

M PE. Senior V.P. — Operations & Projects

Freeport LNG Development, L.P. 333 Clay Street, Suite 5050 • Houston, Texas 77002-4173 Phone:713-980-2888•Fax:713-980-2903
§ 556.746 Tylosin. ( a ) [Reserved]
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for tylosin are: ( 1 ) *Cattle.* ( i ) Liver, kidney, fat, and muscle: 0.2 ppm.
( ii ) Milk: 0.05 ppm.
( 2 ) *Chickens and turkeys.* ( i ) Liver, kidney, fat, and muscle: 0.2 ppm.
( ii ) Eggs: 0.2 ppm.
( 3 ) *Swine.* Liver, kidney, fat, and muscle: 0.2 ppm.
( 4 ) *Honey.* 500 ppb.
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See §§ 520.2640, 522.2640, 558.625, and 558.630 of this chapter.
[84 FR 32993, July 11, 2019, as amended at 85 FR 18121, Apr. 1, 2020]
§ 573.680 Mineral oil. Mineral oil may be safely used in animal feed, subject to the provisions of this section. ( a ) Mineral oil, for the purpose of this section, is that complying with the definition and specifications contained in § 172.878 (a) and (b) or in § 178.3620(b)(1) (i) and (ii) of this chapter.
( b ) It is used in animal feeds for the following purposes: ( 1 ) To reduce dustiness of feeds or mineral supplements.
( 2 ) To serve as a lubricant in the preparation of pellets, cubes, or blocks and to improve resistance to moisture of such pellets, cubes, or blocks.
( 3 ) To prevent the segregation of trace minerals in mineralized salt.
( 4 ) To serve as a diluent carrier in the manufacture of feed grade biuret in accordance with good manufacturing practice.
( 5 ) For the removal of water from substances intended as ingredients of animal feed.
( c ) The quantity of mineral oil used in animal feed shall not exceed 3.0 percent in mineral supplements, nor shall it exceed 0.06 percent of the total ration when present in feed or feed concentrates.
[41 FR 38652, Sept. 10, 1976, as amended at 47 FR 41106, Sept. 17, 1982]
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7893 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 544
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7893

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              June 4, 2024

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

                           September 25, 2024

               Reported by Mr. Peters, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 306 Pickens Street in Marion, Alabama, as the ``Albert Turner, Sr. 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. ALBERT TURNER, SR. POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 306 Pickens Street in Marion, Alabama, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Albert Turner, Sr. Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Albert 
Turner, Sr. Post Office Building''.
                                                       Calendar No. 544

118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 7893

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 306 Pickens Street in Marion, Alabama, as the ``Albert Turner, Sr. 
                        Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 25, 2024

                       Reported without amendment
```
Editorial Note on Part 866
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 866 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 866.4600 Ouchterlony agar plate. ( a ) *Identification.* An ouchterlony agar plate for clinical use is a device containing an agar gel used to examine antigen-antibody reactions. In immunodiffusion, antibodies and antigens migrate toward each other through gel which originally contained neither of these reagents. As the reagents come in contact with each other, they combine to form a precipitate that is trapped in the gel matrix and is immobilized.
( b ) *Classification.* Class I (general controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to the limitations in § 866.9.
[47 FR 50823, Nov. 9, 1982, as amended at 54 FR 25047, June 12, 1989; 66 FR 38792, July 25, 2001]