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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SHIRLEY GRACE KESAULYA; et al.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-72416

Agency Nos. A097-614-139

 A097-614-140

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 13, 2014** 

Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

Shirley Grace Kesaulya and her son, natives and citizens of Indonesia,

petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying

their motion to reconsider. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reconsider. CanoFILED

MAY 22 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * 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).
Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002). We dismiss in part and deny in

part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review petitioners’ contentions related to asylum,

equitable tolling of the one-year filing requirement, and reopening to submit

additional evidence because petitioners failed to raise these issues to the BIA. See

Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004). Further, we decline to

consider the 2010 religious freedom report petitioners reference in their opening

brief because our review is limited to the administrative record underlying the

agency’s decision. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 963 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to

reconsider their withholding of removal claim in light of this court’s disfavored

group cases because petitioners did not demonstrate sufficient individualized risk

to show it is more likely than not they would be persecuted in Indonesia. See

Halim v. Holder, 590 F.3d 971, 979 (9th Cir. 2009); Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d

1049, 1066 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[a]n applicant for withholding of removal will need to

adduce a considerably larger quantum of individualized-risk evidence to prevail

than would an asylum applicant”). Finally, we reject petitioners’ pattern and

practice argument.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

2 10-72416
-cr-06239-WPD Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/08/2000 P
-cr-06239-WPD Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/08/2000 P
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5017 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5017

  To amend part B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to expand 
 coverage of durable medical equipment to include physician prescribed 
  equipment necessary so unpaid caregivers can effectively and safely 
                           care for patients.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 27, 2000

    Mr. Brown of Ohio (for himself and Mr. Bilbray) introduced the 
following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in 
    addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend part B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to expand 
 coverage of durable medical equipment to include physician prescribed 
  equipment necessary so unpaid caregivers can effectively and safely 
                           care for patients.

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

SECTION 1. EXPANDING MEDICARE COVERAGE OF DURABLE MEDICAL EQUIPMENT TO 
              INCLUDE PHYSICIAN PRESCRIBED EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO 
              ENSURE UNPAID CAREGIVERS CAN EFFECTIVELY AND SAFELY CARE 
              FOR PATIENTS.

    (a) In General.--Section 1861(n) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395x(n)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``Such 
term includes equipment that is prescribed by a physician who is 
primarily reponsible for the ongoing care of the patient and that 
ensures that an unpaid caregiver can effectively and safely care for 
the patient.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to equipment furnished on or after January 1, 2001.
                                 <all>
```
§ 775.14 Hearings. ( a ) Public hearings must be held whenever there is: ( 1 ) Substantial environmental controversy concerning a proposed action and a request for a hearing by any responsible individual or organization;
( 2 ) A request for a hearing by an agency with jurisdiction over or special expertise concerning the proposed action; or
( 3 ) A reasonable expectation that a hearing will produce significant information not likely to be obtained without a hearing.
( b ) The distribution and notice requirements of §§ 775.11(d)(1) and 775.13 must be complied with whenever a hearing is to be held.
[44 FR 63525, Nov. 5, 1979. Redesignated and amended at 63 FR 45719, 45722, Aug. 27, 1998]
#### § 25.609 Settlement and notice to claimant.

If a claim is determined to be meritorious in any amount, the claimant must sign a written acceptance and release or a claim settlement agreement before payment. Although larger claims may be considered, no claim may be approved or paid in an amount that exceeds $1,000.00.
§ 2.4 Seal. ( a ) The Seal of the Postal Service is filed by the Board in the Office of the Secretary of State, and is required by 39 U.S.C. 207 to be judicially noticed. The Seal shall be in the custody of the General Counsel, who shall affix it to all commissions of officers of the Postal Service, and use it to authenticate records of the Postal Service and for other official purposes. The following describes the Seal adopted for the Postal Service: ( 1 ) A stylized bald eagle is poised for flight, facing to the viewer's right, above two horizontal bars between which are the words “U.S. MAIL”, surrounded by a square border with rounded corners consisting of the words “UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE” on the left, top, and right, and consisting of nine five-pointed stars on the base.
( 2 ) The color representation of the Seal shows, a white field on which the bald eagle appears in dark blue, the words “U.S. MAIL” in black, the bar above the words in red, the bar below in blue, and the entire border consisting of the words “UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE” and stars in ochre.
( b ) The location and description of the Postal Service emblem is described at 39 CFR 221.7.
#### § 230.40 Determination of claims.

Upon receipt of a claim under this subpart, the Office of Inspector General must conduct an investigation to determine the merits of the claim. The results of the investigation must be submitted to the ruling official, who must approve or deny the claim by written decision, a copy of which must be forwarded to the claimant by certified mail. If the claim is granted, the conditions of relief and the procedures to be followed to obtain the relief shall be set forth. If the claim is denied, the claimant shall be advised of the reason for such denial. For claims involving firearms or contraband, the ruling official shall consult with the Office of Inspector General, Office of General Counsel prior to rendering a decision.
§ 3050.20 Compliance and other analyses in the Postal Service's section 3652 report. ( a ) The Postal Service's section 3652 report shall include an analysis of the information that it contains in sufficient detail to demonstrate the degree to which, in the fiscal year covered by its report, each of its products (market dominant and competitive) comply with all of the applicable provisions of title 39 of the United States Code and the regulations promulgated thereunder, and promote the public policy objectives set out in title 39 of the United States Code.
( b ) Its analysis shall be applied to products individually, and, where appropriate, to products collectively.
( c ) It shall address such matters as non-compensatory rates and failures to achieve stated goals for on-time delivery standards. A more detailed analysis is required when the Commission observed and commented upon the same matter in its Annual Compliance Determination for the previous fiscal year.
[74 FR 20850, May 5, 2009, as amended at 85 FR 81139, Dec. 15, 2020]
§ 101-1.104-2 Distribution. ( a ) Each agency shall designate an official to serve as liaison with GSA on matters pertaining to the distribution of FPMR and other publications in the FPMR series. Agencies shall report all changes in designation of agency liaison officers to the General Services Administration (CAR), Washington, DC 20405.
( b ) FPMR and other publications in the FPMR series will be distributed to agencies in bulk quantities for internal agency distribution in accordance with requirements information furnished by liaison officers. FPMR and other publications in the FPMR series will not be stocked by, and cannot be obtained from, GSA regional offices.
( c ) Agencies shall submit their consolidated requirements for FPMR and other publications in the FPMR series, including requirements of field activities, and changes in such requirements on GSA Form 2053, Agency Consolidated Requirements for GSA Regulations and Other External Issuances (illustrated at § 101-1.4902-2053). The mailing address is shown on the form.
[36 FR 4983, Mar. 16, 1971, as amended at 53 FR 2739, Feb. 1, 1988]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-cv-23324-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

ROBIN LANDAU, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JOHN LEFKUS,

Defendant.

_______________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Entry of Final 

Judgment, ECF No. [22], filed on March 10, 2023 (“Motion”). The Motion was previously referred 

to the Honorable Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes for a Report and Recommendations (“R&R”) on all 

dispositive matters. See ECF No. [4]. On March 16, 2023, the Magistrate Judge issued a R&R

recommending that the Motion be granted. ECF No. [24]. The R&R states that the parties shall 

file any objections within fourteen days of the date of service of a copy of the R&R. Id. Plaintiff 

Jeffrey Detwiler filed a Notice of Typographical Error in the proposed final judgment, ECF No. 

[24], but otherwise no substantive objections have been filed.

Nevertheless, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the R&R and the record in this 

case, and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. See Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287, 1291 

(11th Cir. 2009) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Upon review, the Court finds the R&R to be well 

reasoned and correct. The Court therefore agrees with the analysis in the R&R and concludes that 

the Motion must be GRANTED for the reasons set forth therein.

Case 1:22-cv-23324-BB Document 25 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2023 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 22-cv-23324-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

2

Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The R&R, ECF No. [24], is ADOPTED; 

2. The Motion, ECF No. [22], is GRANTED;

3. Final Judgment will be issued separately.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on March 31, 2023.

_________________________________

BETH BLOOM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to: 

Counsel of Record

Case 1:22-cv-23324-BB Document 25 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/31/2023 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Sharlene P. Abrams, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that, to my knowledge: (i) the Annual Report of Opsware Inc. on Form 10-Kfor the fiscal year ended January 31, 2006 to which this certification isattached (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) information contained in theReport fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition andresults of operations of Opsware Inc.

Date: April 14,2006
| By:    |   | Sharlene P. Abrams      |
|--------|--------|-------------------------|
| Name:  |   | Sharlene P. Abrams      |
| Title: |   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

This Certification which accompanies the Report is notdeemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to beincorporated by reference into any filing of Opsware Inc. under the SecuritiesAct of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before orafter the date of the Report), irrespective of any general incorporationlanguage contained in such filing.

----
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Quarterly Report of Alaska Airlines, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bradley D. Tilden,
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, as amended; and

      (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

By /S/ Bradley D. Tilden
   ------------------------------------
Bradley D. Tilden
Chief Financial Officer
August 5, 2005
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP00-306-000]

Take notice that on June 1, 2000, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee), tendered for filing 1) a revised accounting of Tennessee's take-or-pay transition surcharges.

                    Tennessee states that this filing of the revised accounting is in compliance                           ( print page 36686)                        with Article XXV of the General Terms and Conditions of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1. Tennessee further states that the request for waiver is based on the fact that Tennessee has not incurred any significant recoverable take-or-pay costs since its last filing on December 1, 1999.                

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or before June 12, 2000. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-14567  Filed 6-8-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
# Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas

November 23, 2021

No. 04

- 21

- 00313

- CR

David GREENWOOD

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 81st Judicial District Court

, Wilson County, Texas

Trial Co urt No. CRW1707142 Honorable Lynn Ellison , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

On November 23 , 2021, the court reporter filed a notification of late record indicating technical issues will prevent timely fi ling of trial exhibits by the November 29, 2021 deadline to file the reporter’s record

. Other than the trial exhibits, the court reporter timely filed the reporter’s record. Because unresolved technical issues form the basis of the court reporter’s request , the court reporter did not estimate a particular length of time in requesting an extension.

We GRANT the reporter’s request for extension

. The court reporter is ORDERED to file with this court no later than December 10 , 2021

, either (1) the remainder of the reporter’s record ; or (2) if technical issues prevent timely filing of the remainder of the reporter’s record, a notification of late record with an estimate for when the reporter’s record will be completed.

_________________________________ Lori I. Valenzuela , Justice

IN WITNESS WHE REOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 23rd day of November, 2021

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Sunspotsand geomagnetism**
 
PDF | Mobi | ePub
 
SuDoc Number:SI 1.12/2:2/8
Item Number:0909-B (online)
CGP systemNumber:001061659
 
June 19, 2018
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. 22-23596-CIV-WILLIAMS/REID

ALEXANDER BOLOTOV, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ZOETOP BUSINESS CO., 

LIMIED, et al., 

Defendants. 

/ 

STANDING DISCOVERY ORDER FOR 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE LISETTE M. REID

The following discovery procedures apply to all civil cases assigned to United States 

Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid. If the parties are unable to resolve their discovery disputes 

without Court intervention, Judge Reid will set the matter for hearing without the need for filing a 

motion. 

The moving party must seek relief within fifteen (15) days after the occurrence of the 

grounds for relief by contacting Judge Reid’s Chambers and requesting a hearing. Judge Reid’s 

telephone number is (305) 523-5780 and her Chambers are located at 301 N. Miami Avenue, 3rd 

Floor, Miami, Florida 33128. 

Once a hearing date is obtained, the movant shall provide notice to all relevant parties by 

filing a Notice of Hearing. The Notice of Hearing shall briefly specify the substance of the 

discovery matter to be heard and include a certification that the parties have complied with the 

pre-filing conference required by Southern District of Florida Local Rule 7.1(a)(3). 

Case 1:22-cv-23596-KMW Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2022 Page 1 of 2
2

No written discovery motions, including motions to compel and motions for protective 

order, shall be filed unless requested by Judge Reid. It is the intent of this procedure to minimize 

the necessity of motions. 

The Court expects all parties to act courteously and professionally in the resolution of their 

discovery disputes and to confer in an attempt to resolve the discovery issue prior to requesting 

the hearing. Personal conferral, in person or by phone, is required unless the opposing party or 

counsel refuses to confer, in which case the moving party should advise the Court in the motion 

of such good faith efforts to confer and the opposing party or counsel’s refusal. The Court may 

impose sanctions, monetary or otherwise, if the Court determines discovery is being improperly 

sought or is not being provided in good faith. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida this 28th day of November 2022. 

LISETTE M. REID

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

cc: All Counsel of Record

Case 1:22-cv-23596-KMW Document 7 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2022 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:22-cv-23074-BB   Document 150-1   Entered on FLSD Docket 06/13/2023   Page 1 of 1
§ 953.9 Change of place of hearing. ( a ) Not later than the date fixed for the filing of the reply, a party may file a motion that the scheduled hearing be held at a place other than that designated in the notice. The motion shall include a supporting statement outlining: ( 1 ) The evidence to be offered in such place;
( 2 ) The names and addresses of the witnesses who will testify; and
( 3 ) The reasons why such evidence cannot be presented in Arlington, VA.
( b ) In ruling on the motion, the presiding officer shall consider the convenience and necessity of the parties and the relevancy of the evidence to be offered.
[59 FR 31538, June 20, 1994, as amended at 63 FR 66050, Dec. 1, 1998]
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5229 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5229

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 219 South Church Street in Odum, Georgia, as the ``Ruth Harris 
                         Coleman Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 20, 2000

   Mr. Kingston (for himself, Mr. Bishop, Mr. Collins, Mr. Lewis of 
 Georgia, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Barr of Georgia, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Deal of 
 Georgia, Mr. Norwood, and Mr. Linder) introduced the following bill; 
        which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 219 South Church Street in Odum, Georgia, as the ``Ruth Harris 
                         Coleman Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. RUTH HARRIS COLEMAN POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 219 South Church Street in Odum, Georgia, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Ruth Harris Coleman 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 Ruth Harris 
Coleman Post Office Building.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 965.3 Notice to parties.

Upon receipt of a mail dispute case, the Recorder, Office of the Judicial Officer, United States Postal Service, 2101 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22201-3078, will send a notice of docketing and submission due date to the parties together with a copy of these rules.

[76 FR 15219, Mar. 21, 2011]