alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-60573 Summary Calendar

GLADYS MADISON, Guardian for Viola Williams, Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

VINTAGE PETROLEUM, INC., PLACID OIL COMPANY, TEXAS INTERNATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION and SOUTHEASTERN NORM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC., Defendants-Appellants,
CONSOLIDATED WITH HENRY LEE WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellee,
VERSUS
VINTAGE PE TROLEUM, INC., PLACID OIL COMPANY, TEXAS INTERNATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION, SOUTHEASTERN NORM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. G.B. "BOOTS" SMITH CORPORATION AND EDDIE S. FUENTE, Defendants-Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Mississippi

3:93-CV-663

May 13, 1996 Before GARWOOD, WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Pursuant to F ED . R. A PP . P. 4, Plaintiffs appealed the districtcourt's judgment dismissing Southeastern Norm Environmental, Inc.

from this lawsuit. Having examined the record and parties' briefs,

we conclude that the court below committe d no reversible error. For essentially the reasons set out in the district court's Memorandum Opinion of July 21, 1995 (Civil Action No. 3:93-CV663(L)(N), S.D. Miss.), we affirm. AFFIRMED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SAMATH DOUNG,

Petitioner,

v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
, Respondent. No. 18

- 72536

Agency No. A025

- 299

- 112

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 16, 2021 * *

Before: GRABER, R. NELSON, and HUNSAKER, Circuit Judges.

Samath Doung , a native and citizen of Cambodia , petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Ap peals’ (“BIA”) order dismissi ng his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.

Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for ab use of

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAR 22 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 18

- 72536

discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Bonill a v. Lynch , 840 F.3d 575, 5 81
(9th Cir. 2016). We review de novo questions of law
, id ., and due process claims

in immig ration proceedings
, Jiang v. Holder , 754 F.3d 733, 738 (9th Cir. 2014).

We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Doung ’s motion to reopen as

untimely, where he filed the motion over 1 2 years after his final order of

deportation and Doung failed to show due diligence for equitable tolling of the

filing deadline after an intervening change in law

. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2)

- (3) ;

see also Lona v. Barr , 958 F.3d 1225, 12 3 0

- 32 (9th Cir. 2020) ( changes in law can

serve as a basis for tolling but a petitioner must show due diligence )

.
The BIA did not err in its co nclusion that Doung’s conviction is

categorically an aggravated felony theft offense. See United States v. Martinez

Hernandez , 932 F.3d 1198, 1206

- 07 (9th Cir. 2019) (California Penal Code § 211
is categorically an aggravated felony theft offense)

. Doung ’s contention that the

BIA erred in denying sua sponte reopening for failure to demonstrate exceptional

circumstances does not otherwise raise a legal or constitutional error to invoke our

jurisdiction. See Bonilla , 840 F.3d at 588 (“[T]his court has juri sdiction to review

Board decisions denying sua sponte reopening for the limited purpose of reviewing
the reasoning behind the decisions for legal or constitutional error.”) ; see also3 18

- 72536

Lona , 958 F.3d at 1234

- 35 (BIA is not required to reopen proceedings sua sponte

even in a situation involving a fundamental change in law)

.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part

.
§ 905.735-201 General standards of conduct. ( a ) All employees shall conduct themselves on the job so as to efficiently discharge the work of the Corporation. Courtesy, consideration, and promptness are to be observed in dealing with the public, Congress, and other governmental agencies.
( b ) All employees shall conduct themselves off the job so as not to reflect adversely upon the Corporation or the Federal service.
( c ) Employee conduct shall exemplify the highest standards of integrity. Employees shall avoid any action, whether or not specifically prohibited by this part, which might result in, or create the appearance of: ( 1 ) Using public office for private gain;
( 2 ) Giving preferential treatment to any person;
( 3 ) Impeding Government efficiency or economy;
( 4 ) Losing complete independence or impartiality;
( 5 ) Making a Government decision outside official channels; or
( 6 ) Affecting adversely the confidence of the public in the integrity of the Government.
§ 1631.2 Definitions. As used in this part: ( a ) *Capital improvement* means spending more than $25,000 of LSC funds to improve real estate through construction or the addition of fixtures that become an integral part of real estate.
( b ) *LSC property interest agreement* means a formal written agreement between the recipient and LSC establishing the terms of LSC's legal interest in real estate purchased with LSC funds.
( c ) *Personal property* means property other than real estate.
( d ) *Purchase* means buying personal property or real estate or contracting for services with LSC funds.
( e ) *Quote* means a quotation or bid from a potential source interested in selling or leasing property or providing services to a recipient.
( f ) *Real estate* means land and buildings (including capital improvements), excluding moveable personal property.
( g ) ( 1 ) *Services* means professional and consultant services rendered by persons who are members of a particular profession or possess a special skill and who are not officers or employees of an LSC recipient. *Services* includes, but is not limited to intangible products such as accounting, banking, cleaning, consultants, training, expert services, maintenance of equipment, and transportation.
( 2 ) *Services* does not include: ( i ) Services provided by recipients to their employees as compensation in addition to regular salaries and wages, including but not limited to employee insurance, pensions, and unemployment benefit plans;
( ii ) Insurance, including malpractice insurance provided to staff attorneys and organizational insurance (e.g., directors and officers liability insurance, employment practices liability insurance, and commercial liability insurance);
( iii ) Annual audits required by section 509(a) of Public Law 104-134;
( iv ) Services necessary to conduct litigation on behalf of clients (e.g., expert witnesses, discovery);
( v ) Contracts for services necessary to address a recipient's internal personnel issues, such as labor counsel, investigators, and mediators; and
( vi ) Contracts for employees, whether with the employee directly or with a placement agency.
( h ) *Source* means a seller, supplier, vendor, or contractor who has agreed: ( 1 ) To sell or lease property to the recipient through a purchase or lease agreement; or
( 2 ) To provide services to the recipient through a contract.
SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION { CONVENEDJANUARY3,2001 

SECOND SESSION { 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Thursday, February 1, 2001 

PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF GARY SISCO, 

SECRETARY OF THE SENATE 

By Michelle Haynes, Executive Clerk 
UNANEMOUSCONSENTAGREEMENT 

Ordered, That on Thursday, February 1, 2001, at 9:00a.m., the Senate proceed to executive session to consider 

the nomination of John Ashcroft of Missouri, to be Attorney General (Cal. No. 14) with the time being controlled in 

the following manner: 

the Majority Party: 9:00-9:15 

Mr. Harkin: 9:15 - 9:30 

Mr. Johnson: 9:30-9:45 

the Majority Party: 9:45 - 10:00 

Mr. Sarbanes: 10:00 - 10:15 

the Majority Party: 10:15- 10:30 

Mr. Lieberman: 10:30- 10:45 

the Majority Party: 10:45 - 11:00 

Mr. Edwards: 11:00- 11:10 

Mr. Gramm: 11:10- 11:15 

Mr. Wellstone: 11:15- 11:45 

Mr. Leahy or his designee: 11:45 a.m. - 12:15 p.m. 

Mr. Hatch or his designee: 12:15- 12:45 

Mr. Daschle or his designee: 12:45 - 1:15 

Mr. Bond: 1:15- 1:30 

Mr. Lott: 1:30 - 1:45. 

Ordered further, That at 1:45 p.m., the Senate proceed to vote on the nomination of John Ashcroft, of Missouri. 

(January 31, 2001) 
1 

RESOLUTIONS 

CALENDAR Ex RES REPORTED 

No No SUBJECT BY 
2 

TREATIES 

CALENDAR TREATY REPORTED 

No. Doc. No. SUBJECT BY 
3 

NOMINATIONS 

CALENDAR MESSAGE REPORTED 

No. No. NOMINEE, OFFICE, AND PREDECESSOR BY 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

14 107 John Ashcroft, of Missouri, to be Attorney Jan 30, 2001 Reported by Mr. 

General. Hatch, Committee on the 

Judiciary, without printed report. 

*Signifies nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate 
4 

NOMINATIONS PLACED ON THE SECRETARY'S DESK
**EXHIBIT
      32**  
 **CERTIFICATIONS
        PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 **(18
        U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**
  I, Paul
          D.
          Hamm ,
          the
          Chief Executive Officer and acting as Chief Financial Officer of Integrated
          Media Holdings, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
          pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
          Report of Integrated Media Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarter
          ended September 30, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of
          Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
          information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly presents
          in
          all material respects the financial condition and results of operations
          of
          Integrated Media Holdings, Inc.
  Date:
                      November 16, 2007
                  */s/**Paul
                      D.
                      Hamm*Paul
                      D. Hamm,Chief
                      Executive Officer and Chief Financial
                      Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         164,670
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  694,401
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,128,307
<PP&E>                                          37,897
<DEPRECIATION>                                  14,129
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,188,552
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,416,832
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           616
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,771,104
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,188,552
<SALES>                                      5,333,907
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,445,705
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,170,490
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,275,215
<INCOME-TAX>                                   773,573
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,501,642
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,501,642
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .24


</TABLE>
§ 153.340 Data collection under risk adjustment. ( a ) *Data collection requirements.* If a State is operating a risk adjustment program, the State must collect risk adjustment data.
( b ) *Minimum standards.* ( 1 ) If a State is operating a risk adjustment program, the State may vary the amount and type of data collected, but the State must collect or calculate individual risk scores generated by the risk adjustment model in the applicable Federally certified risk adjustment methodology;
( 2 ) If a State is operating a risk adjustment program, the State must require that issuers offering risk adjustment covered plans in the State comply with data privacy and security standards set forth in the applicable risk adjustment data collection approach; and
( 3 ) If a State is operating a risk adjustment program, the State must ensure that any collection of personally identifiable information is limited to information reasonably necessary for use in the applicable risk adjustment model, calculation of plan average actuarial risk, or calculation of payments and charges. Except for purposes of data validation, the State may not collect or store any personally identifiable information for use as a unique identifier for an enrollee's data, unless such information is masked or encrypted by the issuer, with the key to that masking or encryption withheld from the State. Use and disclosure of personally identifiable information is limited to those purposes for which the personally identifiable information was collected (including for purposes of data validation).
( 4 ) If a State is operating a risk adjustment program, the State must implement security standards that provide administrative, physical, and technical safeguards for the individually identifiable information consistent with the security standards described at 45 CFR 164.308, 164.310, and 164.312.
[77 FR 17248, Mar. 23, 2012, as amended at 78 FR 15528, Mar. 11, 2013]
*No.*5317.

#### Luke Short *v.*The State.

1. Gaming—Indictment.—Faro is one of the games specifically denounced by the statute defining gaming. Indictment, therefore, which charged that the accused did “unlawfully bet and wager at a certain faro bank” sufficiently charged the offense of betting at a gaming table or bank.

S. Practice in the Court of Appeals.—As shown by the verdict in this case, the jury assessed the punishment of the appellant at a fine of ten dollars. The recital in the judgment that the fine assessed was five dollars being evidently a clerical mistake, this court reforms the judgment to conform to the verdict of the jury.

Appeal from the County Court of Tarrant. Tried below before the Hon, Sam Furman, County Judge.

*313Opinion delivered April 27, 1887.

The opinion discloses the case.

Ho brief for the appellant.

*W. L.*Davidson, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Willson, Judge.

It is charged in the indictment that the defendant did “unlawfully bet and wager at a certain faro bank.” This sufficiently charges the offense of betting at a gaming table or bank. (Penal Code, art. 364; Wardlow v. The State, 18 Texas Ct. App., 356; Willson’s Crim. Forms, 245, and cases cited in note.) “Faro” is one of the banking games specifically named in the statute (Penal Code, art. 360), and to allege that the defendant bet at a “faro bank,” is to sufficiently allege the offense of which the defendant has been convicted.

There is an error in the judgment. It adjudges that the State of Texas have and recover of the defendant a fine of five dollars, etc. This is evidently a clerical mistake, as the verdict of the jury assessed the fine against the defendant at ten dollars. We will therefore reform and correct the judgment so as to make it conform to the verdict, as follows: “It is therefore considered and adjudged by the court that the State of Texas do have and recover of and from the defendant, Luke Short, said sum of ten dollars, fine assessed as aforesaid, together with all costs herein incurred,” etc.; and the judgment thus reformed and corrected, is affirmed.

*Deformed, and affirmed.*
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 975 

To require the Federal Communications Commission to reform the 

contribution system of the Universal Service Fund, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 27, 2023 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself, Mr. THUNE, Mr. HICKENLOOPER, and Mr. 

MORAN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To require the Federal Communications Commission to reform the contribution system of the Universal Service 

Fund, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Reforming Broadband 

5 Connectivity Act of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. STUDY AND REPORT. 

7 Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment 

8 of this Act, the Federal Communications Commission (re9 ferred to in this Act as the ‘‘Commission’’) shall— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 975 IS

1 (1) conduct a study assessing the need to ex2 pand the contribution base of the Universal Service 

3 Fund to ensure that the contribution requirement 

4 under section 254(d) of the Communications Act of 

5 1934 (47 U.S.C. 254(d)) is imposed fairly and equi6 tably; and 

7 (2) submit to Congress a report on the results 

8 of the study conducted under paragraph (1). 

9 SEC. 3. UNIVERSAL SERVICE FUND CONTRIBUTION SYSTEM 

10 REFORM. 

11 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the 

12 date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall com13 plete a rulemaking to reform the contribution system of 

14 the Universal Service Fund, including by expanding the 

15 contribution base of the Universal Service Fund. 

16 (b) CONSIDERATIONS.—In conducting the rule17 making required under subsection (a), the Commission 

18 shall consider— 

19 (1) the relative equities and burdens of the pro20 posed changes to the contribution system of the Uni21 versal Service Fund with respect to consumers and 

22 businesses; 

23 (2) the impact of the proposed changes to the 

24 contribution system of the Universal Service Fund 

25 on seniors; and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 975 IS

1 (3) the findings and recommendations in the re2 port submitted under section 2(2). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ACCREDO HEALTH, INCORPORATED FOR THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                              JUL-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          58,478
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   87,862
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,512
<INVENTORY>                                     32,311
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               175,780
<PP&E>                                           9,895
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,722
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 256,744
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           82,893
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           169
<OTHER-SE>                                     170,951
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   256,744
<SALES>                                         95,596
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                99,576
<CGS>                                           82,114
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   85,008
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,552
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 414
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,742
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,229
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,364
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,364
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .21


</TABLE>
#### § 1622.1 Purpose and scope.

This part is designed to provide the public with full access to the deliberations and decisions of the Board of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation, committees of the Board, and state Advisory Councils, while maintaining the ability of those bodies to carry out their responsibilities and protecting the rights of individuals.