alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
River

Columbia

John

Day

River

John

Fork

Fork

Middle

North

Fork

Day

River

South

North

Fork

Deschutes River

112

63

 WASCO COUNTY

JEFFERSON COUNTY

WHEELER COUNTY

CROOK COUNTY

MORROW COUNTY

GRANT COUNTY

UMITILLA COUNION CO

GRANT CO

BAKER CO

GRANT COUNTY

HARNEY COUNTY

SHERMAN CO

GILLIAM CO

Austin

Rufus Biggs

Boardman

Arlington

Wasco

Moro

Cecil

Olex

Grass

Valley

Ione

Lexington

Kent

Heppner

Condon

Shaniko

Mayville

Hardman

Antelope

Fossil

La Grande

Ukiah

Dale

Spray

Monument

Kimberly Hamilton

Mitchell

Long Creek

Fox

Prineville

Sumpter

Dayville

Bates

Mount

Vernon

Post

Prairie City

John

Day

Canyon City

Unity

Paulina

Izee

Seneca

Brothers

Silvies

Heppner

Junction

Clarno

Service

Creek

Richmond

Beech Creek

Logdell

Suplee

Millican

Morgan

Ruggs

Maryhill

Austin

Rufus Biggs

Boardman

Arlington

Wasco

Moro

Cecil

Olex

Grass

Valley

Ione

Lexington

Kent

Heppner

Condon

Shaniko

Mayville

Hardman

Antelope

Fossil

La Grande

Ukiah

Dale

Spray

Monument

Kimberly Hamilton

Mitchell

Long Creek

Fox

Prineville

Sumpter

Dayville

Bates

Mount

Vernon

Post

Prairie City

John

Day

Canyon City

Unity

Paulina

Izee

Seneca

Brothers

Silvies

Heppner

Junction

Clarno

Service

Creek

Richmond

Beech Creek

Logdell

Suplee

Millican

Morgan

Ruggs

Maryhill WASHINGTON

OREGON

84

395

395

395

26

26

26

26

20

97

97

207

244

402

380

207

218

218

293

206

206

19

19

27

19

74

7

10 0 10 20 Kilometers

10 0 10 20 Miles

W

N

E

S

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

PRINEVILLE DISTRICT

John Day Basin

Resource Management Plan

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

2008

Map 5: Fire Response Zones and Fire Regime Condition Class

No warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the accuracy, 

reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate use with other 

data. Original data were compiled from various sources. This information may not 

meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This product was developed through 

digital means and may be updated without notification.

LEGEND

Alternative 1 Wildland Urban Interface and

 Alternative 2-5 Full Suppression

Alternatives 2-5

 Wildland Urban Interface

Alternative 2-5

 Appropriate Management Response

 Fire Regime Condition Class 1

 Fire Regime Condition Class 2

 Fire Regime Condition Class 3

Planning Area Boundary

Administered Land

 Bureau of Land Management

OREGON

84

84 5

5

101

101

395

395

395

199

26

26

26

20

97 197

97

20

95

26

30

Coos Bay

Florence

Newport

Portland The

Dalles

Albany

Bend

Salem

Tillamook

Eugene

Madras

Roseburg

Medford

Lakeview

Burns

Vale

Pendleton

Baker

City

Klamath

Falls

Grants Pass

Astoria

PA

C I F I C

O

C

E

A

N

Prineville 

District

John Day Basin

Planning

Area

John Day Basin

Planning

Prineville

John

Day

M07-09-01:4-08-08
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

URMI RAHMAN,

Petitioner,

v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 71448

Agency No. A075

- 708

- 640

MEMORANDUM *

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

Submitted November 9, 2020 * *

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, TASHIMA and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Urmi Rahman , a native and citizen of Bangladesh, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen

removal proceedings

. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review

for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Bonilla v. Lynch
, 840 F.3d 575, 581 (9th C ir. 2016). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition

* 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

NOV 16 2020

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

- 71448

for review.

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

.

A s to her fear of harm based on her family and her father’s political activities
,
Rahman has not established material changed country conditions in Bangladesh to
qualify for the regulatory exception to the filing deadline , and her motion was filed

more than four years after her order of removal became final

. S ee 8 C.F.R.

§ 1003.2(c) (2), (3)( ii); Najmabadi v. Holder , 597 F.3d 983, 987

- 90 (9th Cir. 2010)
(evidence must be “qualitatively different” to warrant reopening)

. As to her fear of

harm from ISIS , Rahman has not established prima facie eligibility for relief,

where she is ineligible for asylum because the agency previously found she was

firmly resettled in Sweden and has not shown it is more likely than not that she

would be individually targeted for future persecution or torture. See Toufighi v.

Mukasey , 538 F.3d 988, 996 (9th Cir. 2008) (requiring movant to establish prima

facie eligibility for the relief sought) ; 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(vi) ( an applicant
may not be granted asylum if she “was firmly resettled in another country prior to
arriving in the United States” )

.
Rahman’s c ontention s regarding cancellation of removal were not exhausted

in her motion to reopen

. See Barron v. Ashcroft , 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004)

(generally requiring exhaustion of claims). To the extent she challenges this
court’s April 2017 dismissal of her prior petition for review, her contentions are3 18

- 71448

not properly before the court. See Fed. R. App. P. 40 (a)(1) (petition for panel

rehearing must be filed within 45 days after entry of judgment)

. The temporary stay of removal remains in place until iss uance of the

mandate. The motion for a stay of removal (Docket Entry No. 24 ) is otherwise

denied.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
Before the Third Division,

SEPTEMBER 20, 1966

No. P66/222. —

No. P66/223. —

#### Charles Sadek Import Co., Inc. *v.*United States, protests 62/8895, etc. (New York). Arnart Imports, Inc., and Continental Merchandise Co., Inc., protests 64/15769 and 60/14076 (New York).

Landis, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of statuary, sculptures, and/or copies, replicas, or reproductions thereof, valued at not less than $2.50 each, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.*v. *United States*(39 CCPA 15, C.A.D. 458), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.1


                            CERTIFICATE OF SECRETARY

                                       OF

                      PACIFIC SUNWEAR OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
                            a California corporation


         I, Carl W. Womack, Secretary of Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc., a
California corporation (this "Corporation"), hereby certify that attached hereto
as Exhibit A is a true, correct and complete copy of the amendment to Article
III, Section 2 of the Bylaws of this Corporation as duly adopted by an Action by
Unanimous Written Consent of the Board of Directors of this Corporation,
effective as of August 19, 1998.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certificate as of
August 19, 1998.


                                             /s/ CARL W. WOMACK
                                             -----------------------------------
                                                 Carl W. Womack
                                                 Secretary
<PAGE>   2
                                   EXHIBIT A

                     Amendment to Article III, Section 2 of
               the Bylaws of Pacific Sunwear of California, Inc.,
                            a California corporation

                        Effective as of August 18, 1998


         SECTION 2. NUMBER AND QUALIFICATION OF DIRECTORS. The authorized number
of directors shall be not less than five nor more than nine until changed by
Amendment of the Articles of Incorporation or by a Bylaw duly adopted by
approval of the outstanding shares. The exact number of directors shall be
fixed, within the limits specified, by amendment of the next sentence duly
adopted either by the Board of Directors or the shareholders. The exact number
of directors shall be six until changed as provided in this Section 2.
From: annamaven@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:28:28 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Anna Derry

Rockville, MD 20850
#### Joan Winn, Appellant, v City University of New York, Respondent.

[663 NYS2d 995]

—Appeal by the plaintiff from an order of the Court of Claims (Blinder, J.), entered February 1, 1994.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated by Judge Blinder at the Court of Claims. Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Copertino, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION FURNISHED PURSUANT TO 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







This certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) and accompanies the Transition Report on Form 10-KT/A (the “Form 10-KT/A”)
for the six months ended June 30, 2012 of InspireMD, Inc. (the “Company”).  I, Craig Shore, the Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify that, based on my knowledge:







|(1) | The Form 10-KT/A fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|(3) | The information contained in the Form 10-KT/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in this report.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Date: January 3, 2013



| |        |                                                      
| | ------ | -----------------------------------------------------
| | By:    | /s/ Craig Shore                                      
| | Name:  | Craig Shore                                          
| | Title: | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)





The foregoing certification is being furnished
as an exhibit to the Form 10-K/T pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly,
is not being filed as part of the Form 10-KT/A for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of
any general incorporation language in such filing.
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 362 

Honoring the life of Coach Edward ‘‘Eddie’’ Robinson. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 2, 2007 

Mr. ALEXANDER submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring the life of Coach Edward ‘‘Eddie’’ Robinson. 

Whereas Edward ‘‘Eddie’’ Robinson was born on February 

13, 1919, in Jackson, Louisiana, as the son of sharecroppers; 

Whereas Eddie Robinson graduated from McKinley Senior 

High School in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, in 1937, earned 

a bachelor’s degree from Leland College in Baker, Louisiana, in 1940, graduated with a master’s degree in 

science from the University of Iowa in 1954, and received 

an honorary Doctor of Laws from Louisiana Tech University and an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters from 

Yale University; 

Whereas in 1941, Eddie Robinson began his coaching career 

at the Louisiana Negro Normal and Industrial Institute, 

renamed Grambling State University in 1974; 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 362 IH 

Whereas Eddie Robinson’s tenure at Grambling State University stretched from the start of his coaching career in 

1941 to his retirement in 1997, a period that included 

11 Presidents of the United States and several wars; 

Whereas Eddie Robinson broke the record set by Bear Bryant as collegiate football’s ‘‘winningest’’ coach in 1985, 

became the first collegiate coach ever to win 400 games 

in 1995, and retired from coaching in 1997 with a record 

of 408 wins, 165 losses, and 15 ties; 

Whereas throughout his coaching career, Eddie Robinson won 

17 Southwestern Athletic Conference titles, 9 National 

Black College championships, and had only eight losing 

seasons; 

Whereas Eddie Robinson received more awards than any 

other coach in history, and his name adorns streets 

throughout Louisiana, stadiums, and national awards; 

and 

Whereas Eddie Robinson was a dedicated coach, educator, 

role model, husband, and father, and he will be remembered as one of college football’s most beloved coaches: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors 

2 the life of Edward ‘‘Eddie’’ Robinson, and his service as 

3 an educator, community leader, and outstanding coach. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PROD1PC77 with BILLS
From: katij77@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:24:14 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Kathi J Andrews

Parker, AZ 85344
From: mesegedi@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:37:28 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Mary Segedi

Apalachin, NY 13732
112

63

Austin

Rufus

Biggs

Boardman

Arlington

Wasco

Moro

Cecil

Olex

Grass

Valley

Ione

Lexington

Kent

Heppner

Condon

Shaniko

Mayville

Hardman

Antelope

Fossil

La Grande

Ukiah

Dale

Spray

Monument

Kimberly Hamilton

Mitchell

Long Creek

Fox

Prineville

Sumpter

Dayville

Bates

Mount

Vernon

Post

Prairie City

John

Day

Canyon City

Unity

Paulina

Izee

Seneca

Brothers

Silvies

Heppner

Junction

Clarno

Service

Creek

Richmond

Beech Creek

Logdell

Suplee

Millican

Morgan

Ruggs

Maryhill

Austin

Rufus

Biggs

Boardman

Arlington

Wasco

Moro

Cecil

Olex

Grass

Valley

Ione

Lexington

Kent

Heppner

Condon

Shaniko

Mayville

Hardman

Antelope

Fossil

La Grande

Ukiah

Dale

Spray

Monument

Kimberly Hamilton

Mitchell

Long Creek

Fox

Prineville

Sumpter

Dayville

Bates

Mount

Vernon

Post

Prairie City

John

Day

Canyon City

Unity

Paulina

Izee

Seneca

Brothers

Silvies

Heppner

Junction

Clarno

Service

Creek

Richmond

Beech Creek

Logdell

Suplee

Millican

Morgan

Ruggs

Maryhill

SHERMAN COUNTY

GILLIAM COUNTY

 WASCO COUNTY

JEFFERSON COUNTY

WHEELER COUNTY

CROOK COUNTY

MORROW COUNTY

GRANT COUNTY

UMITILLA COUNION CO

GRANT CO

BAKER CO

GRANT COUNTY

HARNEY COUNTY

WASHINGTON

OREGON

84

395

395

395

26

26

26

26

20

97

97

207

244

402

380

207

218

218

293

206

206

19

19

27

19

74

7

River

Columbia

John

Day

River

John

Fork

Fork

Middle

North

Fork

Day

River

South

North

Fork

Deschutes River

10 0 10 20 Kilometers

10 0 10 20 Miles

W

N

E

S

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

PRINEVILLE DISTRICT

John Day Basin

Resource Management Plan

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

2008

No warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the accuracy, 

reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate use with other 

data. Original data were compiled from various sources. This information may not 

meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This product was developed through 

digital means and may be updated without notification.

Geothermal Potential

 High

 Moderate

 

LEGEND

Planning Area Boundary

Administered Land

 Bureau of Land Management

 Forest Service

 John Day Fossil Beds

 National Monument

 Other Federal

 State

 Private or Other

OREGON

84

84 5

5

101

101

395

395

395

199

26

26

26

20

97 197

97

20

95

26

30

Coos Bay

Florence

Newport

Portland The

Dalles

Albany

Bend

Salem

Tillamook

Eugene

Madras

Roseburg

Medford

Lakeview

Burns

Vale

Pendleton

Baker

City

Klamath

Falls

Grants Pass

Astoria

PA

C I F I C

O

C

E

A

N

Prineville 

District

John Day Basin

Planning

Area

John Day Basin

Planning

Prineville

John

Day

Map 24: Geothermal Development Potential M07-09-01:3-4-08
Before the First Division,

November 26, 1968

No. P68/498.

protest 64/16611 (Cleveland).

#### The Bendix Corporation *v.*United States,

Maletz, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of scientific instruments similar in all material respects to those the subject of *The Bendix Corporationv. United States*(57 Cust. Ct. 184, C.D. 2759), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.