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).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JULIAN RENDON, a.k.a. Julian NunezRendon; et al.,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 06-71701

Agency No. A091-427-137

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted October 8, 2010** 

San Francisco, California

Before: HUG, RYMER and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Julian Rendon, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the

decision by the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s Legalization Appeals

Unit (LAU). The LAU dismissed his appeal, of the Legalization Director’s denial

FILED

OCT 20 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 Nor does Rendon show that the Douglas Immigration and Naturalization 1

Service (INS) office was actually aware of his application to adjust status. Cf.

Manjiyani v. Ashcroft, 343 F.3d 1018, 1020 (9th Cir. 2003).

2

of his application for legalization under the Special Agricultural Workers (SAW)

program, as untimely. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and deny

the petition for review. 

The LAU’s finding was neither an abuse of discretion nor directly contrary

to the facts in the record taken as a whole. Rendon did not provide any evidence

that supported his claim that he did not receive notice of the denial of his SAW

application. A conclusory statement that one did not receive notice is not 1

sufficient to overcome a presumption of proper delivery in order to assert a due

process claim. See Sembiring v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 981, 989-90 (9th Cir. 2007). 

The INS took the necessary “additional reasonable steps” to locate Rendon’s

address after the August 14, 1992 Notice of Intent to Deny (sent by certified mail

to Rendon’s address of record) was returned unclaimed. See Jones v. Flowers, 547

U.S. 220, 234 (2006). The INS then sent a second Notice of Intent to Deny to the

last address provided by Rendon (in correspondence to the INS). Although the

second notice was also returned unclaimed, the Notice of Decision mailed to the

same address was not returned. Thus, it is presumed that it was received. See

Busquets-Ivars v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 1008, 1009 (9th Cir. 2003) (“[I]t is presumed
3

that a properly-addressed piece of mail placed in the care of the Postal Service has

been delivered.” (quoting Mulder v. Comm’r, 885 F.2d 208, 212 (5th Cir. 1988)). 

Therefore, the LAU did not abuse its discretion in finding the appeal untimely.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
#### In the Matter of the Petition of M. LEGENDIE, to Vacate an Assessment, etc., Respondent, *v.*THE MAYOR, Etc., Appellant.

*Practice*— *appeal.*

Appeal from an order changing the number of the petitioner’s lot, from 2,168 to 2,163, in an order made on the 13th of October, 1873, vacating an assessment. The change was made to correct a mistake, which was shown to have been made in the number of the lot intended to be relieved. It appeared that' the proofs were materially defective upon the hearing which resulted in the order vacating the assessment, and for that reason the correction of the mistake was opposed. The objection, however, was disregarded, and the mistake corrected. No appeal was taken from the order by which the assessment was directed to be made. The General Term *held,*that it was to be assumed that the court intended that the petitioner should be relieved from the assessment, he complained of as unlawful, and that was upon the lot represented by the corrected number; that all that was done by the order appealed from was to rectify this mistake; that if the appellant desired to procure a review of the first order it must appeal from that.

*William, Barnes,*for appellant. *Herbert A. Shipman,*for respondent.

*249Opinion by

Daniels, J.

Davis, P. J., and Brady, J., concurred.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.
250 E Street SW

Washington, D.C. 20525

202-606-5000/ 800-942-2677

Member Management Litmos Courses

 

1) Site and Subgrantee Management 

 

Description: This course defines sites and subgrantees; demonstrates sources of 

requirements for site and subgrantee management; describes key elements of site 

management (site selection, site training, and site monitoring); highlights role of 

commissions (requirements as Prime grantees and subgrantee compliance); and 

includes examples of a site training manual table of contents and a site agreement.

Access this course

 

2) Sustainability Planning 

Description: This course defines AmeriCorps expectations for grantees’ 

sustainability planning; describes several challenges facing grantees (structure of 

national service funding/programing and nature of nonprofit work); outlines 

components of sustainability planning (play books, talent management, and 

infrastructure); and includes examples of planned and unplanned transitions 

(retirement of founding program director, change in governor, and natural 

disaster).

Access this course
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-cv-23753-MOORE/BECERRA

EDWIN GARRISON, et al., on behalf of 

themselves and all other similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SAM BANKMAN-FRIED, et al.,

Defendants.

/

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE PRO HAC VICE

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Jessica Stebbins Bina of the law firm Latham & Watkins 

LLP appears as counsel for Defendant Shaquille O’Neal, and requests that all papers served in this 

case also be delivered to and served at the address set forth below. 

Per Rule 4(b)(4) of the Rules Governing the Admission, Practice, Peer Review, and 

Discipline of Attorneys for the Southern District of Florida, Ms. Stebbins Bina was previously 

admitted to appear pro hac vice in this case on behalf of Defendants Thomas Brady and Gisele 

Bündchen and states that all information provided in support of her initial pro hac vice motion 

remains current and correct, including the sponsoring co-counsel.

Dated: May 8, 2023. 

Respectfully submitted,

COLSON HICKS EIDSON, P.A.

255 Alhambra Circle, Penthouse

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

Telephone: (305) 476-7400

Facsimile: (305) 476-7444

By: Roberto Martínez

Roberto Martínez

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 184 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/08/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

Florida Bar No. 305596 

Email: bob@colson.com

 Attorney for Defendant Shaquille O’Neal

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 184 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/08/2023 Page 2 of 2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: DESIGNATION OF CHAIR AND

VICE-CHAIR OF THE DOMESTIC

RELATIONS PROCEDURAL RULES 

COMMITTEE 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 624

CIVIL PROCEDURAL RULES DOCKET

 O R D E R

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 11th day of June, 2015, David J. Slesnick, Esquire, is 

hereby designated as Chair and Ellen M. Sweeney, Esquire as Vice-Chair of the 

Domestic Relations Procedural Rules Committee commencing June 25, 2015.
#### § 66.05-25 Change and modification of State aids to navigation.

Wherever a State Administrator determines the need for change in State aids to navigation, he or she must inform the District Commander of the nature and extent of the changes, as soon as possible, but not less than 30 days in advance of making the changes.

[USCG-2001-10714, 69 FR 24982, May 5, 2004]
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 118 (Monday, June 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 37960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15404]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1103]


Termination of Foreign-Trade SubZone 121B Rensselaer, New York

    Pursuant to the authority granted in the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of 
June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the Foreign-Trade 
Zones Board Regulations (15 CFR Part 400), the Foreign-Trade Zones 
Board has adopted the following order:
    Whereas, on December 12, 1995, the Foreign-Trade Zones Board issued 
a grant of authority to the Capital District Regional Planning 
Commission, authorizing the establishment of Foreign-Trade Subzone 121B 
at the BASF Corporation plant in Rensselaer, New York (Board Order 794, 
61 FR 1322, 1/19/96);
    Whereas, the Commission advised the Board on August 31, 1999 (FTZ 
Docket 13-2000), that zone procedures were no longer needed at the 
facility and requested voluntary termination of Subzone 121B;
    Whereas, the request has been reviewed by the FTZ Staff and the 
Customs Service, and approval has been recommended;
    Now, therefore, the Foreign-Trade Zones Board terminates the 
subzone status of Subzone No. 121B, effective this date.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of June, 2000.
Troy H. Cribb,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

Dennis Puccinelli,
Acting Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-15404 Filed 6-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS OF AMERICAN  CONSUMERS,  INC. FOR THE FISCAL QUARTER ENDED
NOVEMBER  28,  1998  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-28-1998
<CASH>                                       1,237,059
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  194,911
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,940,918
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,415,678
<PP&E>                                       2,977,274
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,181,843
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,215,109
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,320,079
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        88,652
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,521,044
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,215,109
<SALES>                                     12,939,024
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,939,024
<CGS>                                       10,117,832
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,117,832
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,879,352
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,486
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (36,986)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (15,913)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (21,073)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (21,073)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.024)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.024)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            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 Stonewall  Financial,  Ltd. on
Form  10-KSB  for the  period  ending  September  30,  2003,  as filed  with the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, B.
Stephen Bailey, President 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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 result of
                  operations of the Company.


/S/ B. Stephen Bailey
B. Stephen Bailey
President, Director
(Principal Executive Officer)


April 19, 2004


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 101-26.100 Scope of subpart.

This subpart provides policy guidance of a general nature concerning procurement of lowest cost items obtainable from GSA supply sources; availability from GSA of special buying services in addition to the specified GSA procurement sources; criteria for placing end-of-year purchase documents with GSA and for insuring that end-of-year requisitions placed with GSA obligate the applicable fiscal year appropriation; and justification requirements to support negotiated procurement by GSA for other agencies.

[36 FR 17423, Aug. 31, 1971]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-62103-CIV-SINGHAL

SVETLANA IGNATOVA,

Petitioner,

v.

UR M. JADDOU, et al.,

Respondents.

_______________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Respondents’ Motion to Dismiss 

(“Motion”) (DE [11]) and the Report and Recommendation (DE [15]) of the Magistrate 

Judge recommending that the Motion be granted. The Court has reviewed the entire file 

and record and has made a de novo review of the issues. No objections to the magistrate 

judge’s Report and Recommendation having been filed, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (DE [15]) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. Respondents’ Motion to 

Dismiss (DE [11]) is GRANTED. Petitioner Svetlana Ignatova’s claims pursuant to the 

Administrative Procedures Act are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and her claims 

pursuant to the Mandamus Act and the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 

Constitution are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Petitioner has fourteen (14) days to 

file an amended complaint asserting only those allegations relevant to her APA claim. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 29th day of 

August 2023.

Copies furnished counsel via CM/ECF

Case 0:22-cv-62103-AHS Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/30/2023 Page 1 of 1
#### § 102-2.60 What is a deviation from the FMR?

A deviation from the FMR is an agency action or policy that is inconsistent with the regulation. (The deviation policy for the FPMR is in 41 CFR part 101-1.)
II

Calendar No. 294

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 560

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 5, 1999

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and

Public Works

SEPTEMBER 29, 1999

Reported by Mr. CHAFEE, without amendment

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at the intersection of Comercio and San

Justo Streets, in San Juan, Puerto Rico, as the ‘‘Jose ́

V. Toledo Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The Federal building and United States courthouse

5 located at the intersection of Comercio and San Justo

6 Streets, in San Juan, Puerto Rico, shall be known and
2

HR 560 RS

designated as the ‘‘Jose ́ 1 V. Toledo Federal Building and

2 United States Courthouse’’.

3 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

4 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

5 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

6 building and United States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Jose ́ 7 V.

8 Toledo Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’.

Passed the House of Representatives May 4, 1999.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 294

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 560

AN ACT

To designate the Federal building and United

States courthouse located at the intersection ofComercio and San Justo Streets, in San Juan,Puerto Rico, as the ‘‘Jose

 ́

V. Toledo Federal

Building and United States Courthouse’’.

SEPTEMBER 29, 1999

Reported without amendment
§ 97.120 Cargo securing manuals. ( a ) Any vessel to which this subpart applies must have a cargo securing manual (CSM) on board that has been approved by the government of the country whose flag the vessel is entitled to fly; and a CSM approved after June 30, 2010, must, at a minimum, meet the guidelines in MSC.1/Circ. 1353/Rev.1, (incorporated by reference, see 33 CFR 97.110).
( b ) A container vessel with a keel laid on or after January 1, 2015, must include a cargo safe access plan that, at a minimum, meets the guidelines in MSC.1/Circ.1352, Annex 14, Guidance on Providing Safe Working Conditions for Securing of Containers on Deck (incorporated by reference, see 33 CFR 97.110).
( c ) While operating in waters under the jurisdiction of the United States, the Coast Guard may board any vessel to which this subpart applies to determine that the vessel has the document(s) required by paragraph (a) of this section on board. Any foreign-flagged vessel found not to be in compliance with paragraph (a) of this section may be detained by order of the Captain of the Port at the port or terminal where the noncompliance is found until the COTP determines that the vessel can go to sea without presenting an unreasonable threat of harm to the port, the marine environment, the vessel, or its crew.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-12-0000619 28-JUN-2013 08:32 AM
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 6Ff %%I!3 

AUSTIN 

PlaInvIew, Texas 

Dear &II. Tibbete: 

oertain offioiale in Hale County 

estion, we assume 

salary payments 

vtsed that 

ur second qnsetion, you ara adk should afthhold the Viotorp 

alary payzmi3nta. The amount or 

r oent of the Wary paid by Hale 

the withholding deduction providFederal Aot. 

Eaoh agenoy paying salary to the ofrioial is to 

be treated as an employer under the hot, and*hould withhold the tax from its payments. Thera Is no provision in 
Eoaorable Xrneet Tlbbets -- p8@ e 

. 

the Aat for apgortlonlnfl the withholdi% deduotions khan 

the employee irr pai~d by ~xore than one ,erployar; oonsequently the full wlthhol4ln~ deduction f.n to be sllowed by caoh employer ir! omputinF the aAmount of salary 

jaid by It subject to the tar. Tbis,~ ae are ll;formed, 

is the rule which is beicg applied by the Collmtora 

oi Internal Asvenue. 

. 

Very truly yours 

ATTOIMm ~SiXZi&4L OF 'TEXAS 

A.X.Y.-LG? 

&lc10suw 

Approved J.an 4, 1943 

Gerald C. I- (a) 

Attorney Ganeral,~o~ Texae 

APPROYE!iOFIl'ZIOIZ CQMPTIGE 

By B.W.R. CFM?.ImAT4 (8) .~
#### § 964.11 Transcript.

Testimony and argument at hearings shall be reported verbatim, unless the presiding officer orders otherwise. Transcripts or copies of the proceedings are supplied to the parties at such rate as may be fixed by contract between the reporter and Postal Service. Any party desiring a copy of the transcript shall order it from the contract reporter in a timely manner to avoid delay in filing briefs.
§ 3040.135 Further proceedings. If the Commission determines that further proceedings are necessary, a conference shall be scheduled to consider the concerns expressed by the Commission. Written statements commenting on the Commission's concerns shall be requested, to be filed 7 days prior to the conference. Upon conclusion of the conference, the Commission shall promptly issue a ruling to: ( a ) Provide for a period of discovery to obtain further information;
( b ) Schedule a hearing on the record for further consideration of the request;
( c ) Explain the reasons for not going forward with additional proceedings and approve the request to modify the market dominant and competitive product lists; or
( d ) Direct other action as the Commission may consider appropriate.
[72 FR 63698, Nov. 9, 2007. Redesignated at 85 FR 9615, Feb. 19, 2020]
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Delta Apparel, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this 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
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report, based on such evaluation;
andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial
reporting; and5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: September 9, 2005
    
    /s/ Robert W. HumphreysPresident and Chief Executive Officer