alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
402 A.2d 705

#### Ray KAISER and Kaiser Associates, Inc. v. Henry MEINZER, J. Walter Gallagher, Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Commonwealth Development and Construction Company, Chemical Bank, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh and George Hyam, Additional Defendant. Appeal of COMMONWEALTH DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Argued March 22, 1979.

Decided April 27, 1979.

Petition for Allowance of Appeal Granted April 10, 1980.

*596Mitchell S. Greenspan, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Neil E. Jokelson, Philadelphia, for appellees Ray Kaiser and Kaiser Associates, Inc.

Before PRICE, SPAETH and LIPEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal reaches us from an order of the court below entered May 15, 1978, striking a judgment entered in favor of appellant. Unfortunately, we do not have the benefit of an opinion as required by Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) and because of the complex nature of the issue involved we feel compelled to require compliance. Accordingly, we remand for an opinion, to be filed within thirty (30) days of this order.

Without limiting the matters to be expressed in said opinion, we direct the attention of the court below to its Order of March 27, 1978 and that the record does not disclose the taking of any exceptions to said Order by either party. Since the judgment here involved is in seeming conformity to the Finding Of The Court entered on March 27, 1978, the opinion should explain the striking of the judgment at least in that particular.

*597In addition to the remand for opinion it is directed that this appeal be consolidated for argument with the appeal presently in this Court at 1789 October Term, 1978.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 130 (Thursday, July 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 41682]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-17096]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the meeting of 
the Board of Scientific Counselors, National Cancer Institute.
    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in 
accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(6) and 
552b(c)(9)(B), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The discussions could reveal 
information of a personal nature where disclosure would constitute a 
clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy and the premature 
disclosure of discussions related to personnel and programmatic issues 
would be likely to significantly frustrate the subsequent 
implementation of recommendations.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, National 
Cancer Institute, Subcommittee A--Clinical Sciences and 
Epidemiology.
    Date: July 24, 2000.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
    Agenda: Discussion of personnel and programmatic issues and 
Review and evaluate individual Principal Investigators.
    Place: National Cancer Institute, Building 31, C Wing, 6th 
floor, Conference Room 6, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Contact Person: Abby Sandler, Executive Secretary, Institute 
Review Office, Office of the Director, National Cancer Institute, 
National Institutes of Health, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 7019, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-7628.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, 
Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 
93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer 
Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer 
Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower, 93.399, Cancer 
Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


    Dated: June 29, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-17096 Filed 7-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 10.35  Lease  Extension   Agreement  Between  Steroben   Associates  and
               Technology Service Group, Inc. Dated August 1, 1996.


                                      124
<PAGE>

                            LEASE EXTENSION AGREEMENT

This agreement made and entered into this 30th day of August, 1996, by and
between STEROBEN ASSOCIATES, hereinafter called the "Lessor" and Technology
Service Group, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Lessee".

Whereas by Lease dated August 1, 1986, Lessor or predecessors in title leased
unto Lessee or predecessor in title, certain premises situate in the Town of
Orange in the County of Orange, Virginia, and fronting along the northern margin
of 315 Byrd Street in said town.

Whereas, Lessor and Lessee mutually desire to extend said lease as set forth
below:

1. Now Therefore, in consideration of the premises and other good and valuable
consideration, parties mutually agree to extend the said lease referenced above,
for an additional term of one (1) year from August 1, 1996 to July 31, 1997,
upon the same terms, conditions and covenants as therein contained, yielding and
paying therefore during the continuance of this lease extension, a monthly
rental of Six Thousand Six Hundred Seventy Five Dollars ($6,675.00), payable
monthly in advance, with the right herein given to Lessee to renew the lease for
five (5) additional terms of one (1) year each, by giving Lessor ninety (90)
days written notice prior to the end of the then current term. If the lease is
not renewed for any additional term of one (1) year the lease will run on a
month to month basis and can be terminated by either party by giving ninety (90)
days prior written notice to the other party.

2. All other terms and conditions of the original lease dated August 1, 1986,
will remain in full force and effect throughout the extension periods.

The rights, privileges and terms herein shall extend to and be binding upon the
Lessor and Lessee and their representatives, heirs, successors and assigns.

In witness whereof, Lessor and Lessee have hereunto set their hands and seals
the day and year first written above.

Signed sealed and delivered in the presence of:

                                            STEROBEN ASSOCIATES

_____________________________               BY:  /s/ HB Sedwick           (SEAL)
                                                ---------------------------
                                            GENERAL PARTNER

                                            TECHNOLOGY SERVICE GROUP, INC.

/s/  Juanita Estes                          BY:  /s/ Ned Rebich           (SEAL)
-----------------------------                   ---------------------------


                                      125
#### § 64.1301 Per-payphone compensation.

In the absence of a negotiated agreement to pay a different amount, each entity listed in Appendix C of the *Fifth Order on Reconsideration and Order on Remand* in CC Docket No. 96-128, FCC 02-292, must pay default compensation to payphone service providers for access code calls and payphone subscriber 800 calls for the period beginning April 21, 1999, in the amount listed in Appendix C for any payphone for any month during which per-call compensation for that payphone for that month was or is not paid by the listed entity. A complete copy of Appendix C is available at *www.fcc.gov.*

[83 FR 11428, Mar. 15, 2018]
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 152 (Tuesday, August 8, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 44994]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6749]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Notice of Sanders County Resource Advisory Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Pub. L. 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community 
Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-393) the Lolo and Kootenai 
National Forests' Sanders County Resource Advisory Committee will meet 
on August 10 at 7 p.m. in Thompson Falls, Montana for a business 
meeting. The meeting is open to the public.

DATES: August 10, 2006.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Thompson Falls Courthouse, 
1111 Main Street, Thompson Falls, MT 59873.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Hojem, Designated Federal 
Official (DFO), District Ranger, Plains Ranger District, Lolo National 
Forest at (406) 826-3821.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda topics include voting on new RAC 
project proposals and receiving public comment. If the meeting location 
is changed, notice will be posted in the local newspapers, including 
the Clark Fork Valley Press, and Sanders County Ledger.

    Dated: July 28, 2006.
Randy Hojem,
DFO, Plains Ranger District, Lolo National Forest.
[FR Doc. 06-6749 Filed 8-7-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4572 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4572

To amend the definition of disabled veteran in chapter 42 of title 38, 
 United States Code, for purposes of employment and training benefits.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 13, 1994

 Mr. Montgomery (by request) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the definition of disabled veteran in chapter 42 of title 38, 
 United States Code, for purposes of employment and training benefits.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 4211(3) of 
title 38, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
            ``(3) The term `disabled veteran' means a person who has a 
        compensable service-connected disability under the laws 
        administered by the Department or one whose discharge or 
        release from active duty was for a disability incurred or 
        aggravated in the line of duty.''.

                                 <all>
```
§ 54.304 Administration of Connect America Fund Intercarrier Compensation Replacement. ( a ) The Administrator shall administer CAF ICC support pursuant to § 51.915 and § 51.917 of this chapter.
( b ) The funding period is the period beginning July 1 through June 30 of the following year.
( c ) For price cap carriers that are eligible and elect, pursuant to § 51.915(f) of this chapter, to receive CAF ICC support, the following provisions govern the filing of data with the Administrator, the Commission, and the relevant state commissions and the payment by the Administrator to those carriers of CAF ICC support amounts that the carrier is eligible to receive pursuant to § 51.915 of this chapter. ( 1 ) A Price Cap Carrier seeking CAF ICC support pursuant to § 51.915 of this chapter shall file data with the Administrator, the Commission, and the relevant state commissions no later than June 30, 2012, for the first year, and on the date it files its annual access tariff filing with the Commission, in subsequent years, establishing the amount of the Price Cap Carrier's eligible CAF ICC funding during the upcoming funding period pursuant to § 51.915 of this chapter. The amount shall include any true-ups, pursuant to § 51.915 of this chapter, associated with an earlier funding period.
( 2 ) The Administrator shall monthly pay each price cap carrier one-twelfth (1/12) of the amount the carrier is eligible to receive during that funding period.
( d ) For rate-of-return carriers that are eligible and elect, pursuant to § 51.917(f) of this chapter, to receive CAF ICC support, the following provisions govern the filing of data with the Administrator, the Commission, and the relevant state commissions and the payment by the Administrator to those carriers of CAF ICC support amounts that the rate-of-return carrier is eligible to receive pursuant to § 51.917 of this chapter. ( 1 ) A Rate-of-Return Carrier seeking CAF ICC support shall file data with the Administrator, the Commission, and the relevant state commissions no later than June 30, 2012, for the first year, and on the date it files its annual access tariff filing with the Commission, in subsequent years, establishing the Rate-of-Return Carrier's projected eligibility for CAF ICC funding during the upcoming funding period pursuant to § 51.917 of this chapter. The projected amount shall include any true-ups, pursuant to § 51.917 of this chapter, associated with an earlier funding period.
( 2 ) The Administrator shall monthly pay each rate-of-return carrier one-twelfth (1/12) of the amount the carrier is to be eligible to receive during that funding period.
[76 FR 73871, Nov. 29, 2011, as amended at 78 FR 26268, May 6, 2013]
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 160 (Friday, August 18, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 47780]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-7044]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, September 1, 2006.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to Be Considered: Surveillance Matters.

For Further Information Contact: Eileen A. Donovan, 202-418-5100.

Eileen A. Donovan,
Acting Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 06-7044 Filed 8-16-06; 11:50 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
#### Gale Lassiter, *Petitioner,*vs. State of Florida, *Defendant.*

143 So. 219.

En Banc.

Decision filed July 21, 1932.

*W. W. Flournoy,*for Petitioner;

*Cary D. Landis,*Attorney General, and *Boy Campbell,*Assistant, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the Circuit Court here on review on writ of certiorari should be quashed on authority of the 'opinion and judgment in the case of Willie Cooper vs. State of Florida, filed this day, and it is so ordered.

Judgment quashed.

Buford, C.J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown, and Davis, J.J., concur.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SYED NAZIM ALI, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

PAYPAL, INC., 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 19-16479 

D.C. No. 5:19-cv-00093-SVK 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Susan G. Van Keulen, Magistrate Judge, Presiding**

Submitted May 4, 2020 ***

Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 

Syed Nazim Ali appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing 

his employment action alleging federal and state law claims. We have jurisdiction 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 

28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

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

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

FILED

MAY 6 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 19-16479 

Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010). We 

affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Ali’s claims for disability 

discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), failure to 

accommodate and retaliation under the California Fair Employment Housing Act

(“FEHA”), wrongful termination, and intentional infliction of emotional distress

because Ali failed to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. As 

recognized by the district court, the email chain Ali attached to his operative 

complaint reveals that PayPal reasonably accommodated to his requests by 

providing him with a “desk for the duration of this contract”. See Ashcroft v. 

Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 679 (2009) (a plaintiff fails to show he is entitled to relief if 

the complaint’s factual allegations “do not permit the court to infer more than the 

mere possibility of [the alleged] misconduct”); Dunlap v. Liberty Nat. Prods., Inc., 

878 F.3d 794, 798-99 (9th Cir. 2017) (elements of an ADA disability 

discrimination claim); Mamou v. Trendwest Resorts, Inc., 81 Cal. Rptr. 3d 406, 

428 (Ct. App. 2008) (elements of a FEHA retaliation claim); Jensen v. Wells Fargo 

Bank, 102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 55, 63 (Ct. App. 2000) (elements of a FEHA failure-toaccommodate claim); Hanson v. Lucky Stores, Inc., 87 Cal. Rptr. 2d 487, 495 (Ct. 

App. 1999) (“The employer is not obligated to choose the best accommodation or 

the accommodation the employee seeks.”); Janken v. GM Hughes Elecs., 53 Cal. 
3 19-16479 

Rptr. 2d 741, 756 (Ct. App. 1996) (“A simple pleading of personnel management 

activity is insufficient to support a claim of intentional infliction of emotional 

distress, even if improper motivation is alleged.”). 

Ali’s assertion of retaliation amount to no more than rank speculation not 

supported by any material facts.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

VICTORIA HALL; RALPH HALL, ) No. 12-15523

individually and on behalf of J.H. )

a minor, ) D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00294-ROS

)

Plaintiffs - Appellants, ) MEMORANDUM*

)

v. )

)

COOLIDGE UNIFIED SCHOOL )

DISTRICT NO. 21, )

)

Defendant - Appellee. )

 )

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Roslyn O. Silver, Senior District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 6, 2013**

San Francisco, California

Before: FARRIS, FERNANDEZ, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Victoria and Ralph Hall appeal the district court’s order which awarded

FILED

NOV 14 2013

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 finds this case suitable for decision without oral

argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
them attorney’s fees after they prevailed in their action against Coolidge Unified

School District No. 21. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(B)(i)(I). We affirm.

We have carefully reviewed the record and we hold that the district court did

not abuse its discretion1

 when it determined the “rates prevailing in the community

in which the action or proceeding arose for the kind and quality of services

furnished”2 and then calculated the fee award based upon those rates.3

AFFIRMED.

1See United States. v. Hinkson, 585 F.3d 1247, 1261–62 (9th Cir. 2009) (en

banc); Shapiro ex rel. Shapiro v. Paradise Valley Unified Sch. Dist. No. 69, 374

F.3d 857, 861 (9th Cir. 2004).

2See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(3)(C); see also Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 895

n.11, 104 S. Ct. 1541, 1547 n.11, 79 L. Ed. 2d 891 (1984); Christensen v.

Stevedoring Servs. of Am., 557 F.3d 1049, 1053 (9th Cir. 2009); Shapiro, 374 F.3d

at 865–66; Barjon v. Dalton, 132 F.3d 496, 502 (9th Cir. 1997); Greater L.A.

Council on Deafness v. Cmty. Television of S. Cal., 813 F.2d 217, 221 (9th Cir.

1987).

3The Halls suggest that the State Bar of Arizona’s, 2010 Economics of Law

Practice in Arizona, upon which the district court relied, is inadmissible hearsay. 

However, that issue was not raised before the district court. We decline to consider

it. See O’Guinn v. Lovelock Corr. Ctr., 502 F.3d 1056, 1063 n.3 (9th Cir. 2007);

Pfingston v. Ronan Eng’g Co., 284 F.3d 999, 1003–04 (9th Cir. 2002).

2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the 
Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Statements of Earnings as reported
in Exhibit 13 of the Form 10-K and is qualified in its entirety by reference to 
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
                       
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Jan-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                              Feb-2-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               Jan-31-1998
<CASH>                                         282,600
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  173,600
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  3,923,500
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,453,800
<PP&E>                                       5,627,500
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,422,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,488,900
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,092,800
<BONDS>                                        901,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        30,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,100,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,488,900
<SALES>                                      6,055,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,055,000
<CGS>                                        4,136,500
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               171,100
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              57,800
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                176,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    64,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            111,800
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   111,800
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.70
        


</TABLE>