alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Investigations Series I-2774 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|

Geologic Map of the Nelson Quadrangle, Lewis and Clark County, Montana

| *By* Mitchell W. Reynolds and William H. Hayes |
|------------------------------------------------|

Version 1.0

|  |
|--|

----

| PDF file for viewing and printing:    (4.2 MB)                        |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                                  |   |
| Map text-only file: (295 KB)                                          |        |
| (This version of the report is accessible as defined in Section 508.) |   |
|                                                                  |        |
| Metadata text file: (30 KB)                                           |   |

| Download GIS and base files                                                |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| ZIPPED archive of ArcInfo files and metadata:    (2.6 MB)                  |
| GZIPPED TAR archive of ArcInfo files and metadata:    (2.6 MB)             |
|                                                                       |
| ZIPPED archive of georeferenced topographic      base files: (1.3 MB)      |
| GZIPPED TAR archive of georeferenced topographic      base files: (1.3 MB) |

| Full-color printed copies of this publication can be purchased at Information      Services, U.S. Geological Survey (1-888-ASK-USGS). |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
**Exhibit
32**
 **CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO**
 **18
U.S.C. Sec.1350,**
 **AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**
 
 In
connection with the Annual Report of The Bluebook International Holding Company
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Mark A. Josipovich, President, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal
Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec.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; and
 
 (2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 *****Date:
      April 15, 2005*
    *By:*
    /s/ Mark A. Josipovich*Mark
      A. Josipovich,*
      **Chief
      Executive Officer, *President
      and Principal *Accounting
      Officer************
Exhibit 35.2



---

EXHIBIT 35.2

SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT

MBNA Technology, Inc.

BA Credit Card Trust

The undersigned,
a duly authorized officer of MBNA Technology, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of FIA Card Services, National Association (FIA), pursuant to the Service Agreement dated as of May 1, 1993 (as amended from time to time, the
Agreement) by and between FIA (formerly known as MBNA America Bank, National Association) and MBNA Technology, Inc. (formerly known as MBNA Information Services, Inc.), does hereby certify that:



|1. | MBNA Technology, Inc. performs certain data processing and administrative functions on behalf of FIA under the Agreement.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | A review of MBNA Technology, Inc.s activities during the period from and including February 1, 2006 through and including June 30, 2006 and of its performance under
the Agreement has been made under my supervision.
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, MBNA Technology, Inc. has fulfilled all of its obligations in all material respects under the Agreement throughout such period.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 25th day of September 2006.



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Scott C. Reynolds  
|Name:  |  | Scott C. Reynolds      
|Title: |  | Chief Operating Officer
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 1 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 2 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 3 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 4 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 5 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 6 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 7 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 8 of 9
Case 2:05-cv-00232-TON Document 76 Filed 09/19/2008 Page 9 of 9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

__________________________________

IN RE: DIET DRUGS (PHENTERMINE/ :

FENFLURAMINE/DEXFENFLURAMINE) : MDL DOCKET NO. 1203

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION :

 :

PEGGY MARTINEZ, et al. :

:

v. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-20135

:

AMERICAN HOME PRODS. CORP., et al. :

:

 :

PRETRIAL ORDER NO. 

AND NOW, on this 1st day of May, 2008, upon

consideration of the motion of Diane McLaughlin and Alzay A.

Dufrene for Substitution, it is hereby ORDERED that Diane

McLaughlin and Alzay A. Dufrene, as heirs to the Estate of Marion

Dufrene, are substituted for the named plaintiff in this action.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Harvey Bartle III 

C.J.

Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB Document 31 Filed 05/01/2008 Page 1 of 1
# Bulletin No. 2017-06

&"Arial,Bold"&12U.S. Standard General LedgerSummary of ChangesDRAFT	

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2017-06	&"Arial,Bold"&P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 4/20/17

# Additional Information

&"Arial,Bold"&12U.S. Standard General LedgerSummary of ChangesDRAFT	

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2017-06	&"Arial,Bold"&P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 4/20/17
From Boucher Michael

Sent Monday January 26 2009 853 PM GMT

To lukascyk.j oseph@epa.gov

Cc Boucher Michael rnboucherrnckennalong corn

Subject Distribution and sale of an unregistered pesticide

Dear Mr Lukascyk

client has obtained information that competitor headquartered in Region is selling an

unregistered pesticide in violation of an express letter prohibition from the Agency and would like

me to turn this information over to you for investigation Would you kindly provide me your title

and street address so that may overnight package of materials to you Thank you

Regards

Michael Boucher

McKENNA LONG ALDRIDGE LLP Attorneys at Law

Michael Boucher 1900 Street NW Suite 100

Tel 202 496-7729 Washington D.C 20006-1102

Fax 202 496-7756 United States of America

Cell 202 306-1645 Tel 202 496-7500

mbouchermckennalonq.com http//www.mckennalonq.com

ALBANY ATLANTA BRUSSELS DENVER LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PHILADELPHIA SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO WASHINGTON D.C
No. 56357.

protests 175345-K (B) and 175345-K (C) (New York).

#### Nathan Newman *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
# C_2017063EN.01001401.xml

| 27.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/14

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 23 November 2016 — Enzo Di Puma v Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)

(Case C-596/16)

(2017/C 063/20)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Enzo Di Puma

Appellant:

Respondent: Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)

Respondent:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that, when a court has delivered a final judgment finding a defendant not to have committed the criminal offence alleged, this precludes the initiation or prosecution of further proceedings based on the same facts with a view to the imposition of penalties which, on account of their nature and severity, may be regarded as criminal penalties, without it being necessary for the national court to make any further assessment? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that, when a court has delivered a final judgment finding a defendant not to have committed the criminal offence alleged, this precludes the initiation or prosecution of further proceedings based on the same facts with a view to the imposition of penalties which, on account of their nature and severity, may be regarded as criminal penalties, without it being necessary for the national court to make any further assessment?

| 2. | In assessing the effectiveness, proportionality and dissuasiveness of penalties, in the context of determining whether there has been a breach of the principle ne bis in idem referred to in Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must the national court take into account the limits for sanctions laid down in Directive 2014/57/EU? (1) |
| --- | --- |

2.

In assessing the effectiveness, proportionality and dissuasiveness of penalties, in the context of determining whether there has been a breach of the principle ne bis in idem referred to in Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must the national court take into account the limits for sanctions laid down in Directive 2014/57/EU? (1)

ne bis in idem

1

---

(1)  Directive 2014/57/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 on criminal sanctions for market abuse (market abuse directive) (OJ 2014 L 173, p. 179).

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6015

RICHARD LAMAR FENSTERMACHER; LARRY C.

MCFARLAND; EDWARD LEE BRAGG; STEVEN WHISENANT,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

G. P. DODSON; RONALD ANGELONE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge.

(MISC-95-46-R)

Submitted: May 16, 1996 Decided: June 3, 1996

Before RUSSELL, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Richard Lamar Fenstermacher, Larry C. McFarland, Edward Lee Bragg,

Steven Whisenant, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellants appeal from the district court's order denying

their motion for a temporary restraining order or a preliminary

injunction prohibiting the Defendants from transferring them from

their current correctional institute or from transferring them

within the institute. To the extent that Appellants appeal from the

court's denial of a temporary restraining order, that order is not

appealable. See Virginia v. Tenneco, Inc., 538 F.2d 1026, 1029-30

(4th Cir. 1976). We have reviewed the record and the district

court's opinion and find no abuse of discretion and no reversible

error. See Direx Israel, Ltd. v. Breakthrough Medical Corp., 952

F.2d 802, 812-13 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm on the

reasoning of the district court. Fenstermacher v. Dodson, No. MISC95-46-R (W.D. Va. Dec. 15, 1995). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in

the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 1 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 2 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 3 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 4 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 5 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 6 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 7 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 8 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 9 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 10 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 11 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 12 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 13 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 14 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 15 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 16 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 17 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 18 of 19
Case 2:02-cv-04408-WY Document 7-4 Filed 12/04/2002 Page 19 of 19
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PATTIE POWERS and

SAMMY POWERS

:

:

: CIVIL ACTION NO. 02-CV-4260

Plaintiffs, :

:

v. :

:

BAYER CORPORATION;

BAYER AG;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC;

GLAXOSMITHKLINE;

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM

:

:

:

:

:

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

:

Defendants. :

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

To the Clerk of the Court:

Kindly enter the appearances of Hope S. Freiwald, Aline Fairweather, Erin

Brennan and Kirstin J. Miller as attorneys for defendant GlaxoSmithKline PLC.

Respectfully Submitted,

_____________________________ _____________________________

Hope S. Freiwald Aline Fairweather

_____________________________ _____________________________

Erin Brennan Kirstin J. Miller

DECHERT PRICE & RHOADS

4000 Bell Atlantic Tower

1717 Arch Street

Philadelphia, PA 19103-2793

(215) 994-4000

Case 2:02-cv-04260-HH Document 6 Filed 09/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
!!	"#$%&'$"#(()((*)(!!	"""$+$'%"%!&%+$! 

,-../01023420-156704896:;-7<59=>?.9@-76=?656.1.46:A7B9C571.-B:D@B601.-?@-<.=:31E0-6546F.G?76.H0679.B:;C@IJ74BKB./G=ALM NOPOQRSTUVWRXVYZ[T\YU]^UTX_R`aRUbcX`decfgcXhijkklYX`VcVeVcYXmnROiopipT`qcXhVYXiQljkjrk

sssOgYfOhYn]tRfRSqYXRurvwxxvyvNPmvQz[{rvwxxvyw|vj}x~]tturvw||vwwv~xj|]lYXVT_VN`

tqRpT\T_bT_qcXRvqVVS`usR\OTU_qcnROYUhsR\jkrrk~jkk|j}~kqVVSusssOgYfOhYnuwkYSTXY`sRTV_TUgOqVW

PqYSScXhlfeR`ZYUlYX`eWRU`


&&#! %!
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas** MEMORANDUM OPINION
N o. 04

- 13

- 00135

- CV IN THE INTEREST OF B.J.A ., et al., Children From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas Trial Court No. 10

- 2398

- CV Honorable Karin B onicoro, Judge Presiding Opinion by: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 9, 2013
AFFIRMED This is an appeal from the trial court’s order terminating appellant’s parental rights to two of her children. Appellant’s court

- appointed appellate attorney filed a brief containing a professional evaluation of the record and demonstrating that there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. Counsel concludes that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See In re R.R ., No. 04

- 03

- 00096

- CV, 2003 WL 21157944, at * 4 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio May 21, 2003, no pet.) (applying Anders procedure in appeal from termination of parental rights) (mem. op.); see also In re K.M. , 98 S.W.3d 774, 775 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth 2003, order) (same). Counsel certified that a copy of his brief was deli vered to appellant who was advised of her right to examine the record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed. After04

- 13

- 00135

- CV reviewing the record, we agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The order of the trial court is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

- 2

-
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 1 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 2 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 3 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 4 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 5 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 6 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 7 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 8 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 9 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 10 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 11 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 12 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 13 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 14 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 15 of 16
Case 2:05-cv-02797-JCJ Document 2 Filed 07/11/05 Page 16 of 16
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

VICTOR HOLDER : CIVIL ACTION

:

vs. :

:

SAMUEL ADJEMAN, et al : NO. 02-6592

O R D E R

AND NOW, TO WIT: This day of September, 2003, it having been reported

that the issues between the parties in the above action have been settled and, upon Order of the Court

pursuant to the provisions of Rule 41.1(b) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure of this Court

(effective January 1, 1970), it is

ORDERED that the above action is DISMISSED with prejudice, pursuant to

agreement of counsel without costs.

BY THE COURT

 

CAROL SANDRA MOORE WELLS

U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Civ 2 (7/83)

41.1(b)

Case 2:02-cv-04352-JF Document 8 Filed 09/24/2003 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:04-cv-01704-MAM Document 1 Filed 04/20/04 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:04-cv-01704-MAM Document 1 Filed 04/20/04 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:04-cv-01704-MAM Document 1 Filed 04/20/04 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:04-cv-01704-MAM Document 1 Filed 04/20/04 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:04-cv-01704-MAM Document 1 Filed 04/20/04 Page 5 of 5
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 CTI Molecular Imaging, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Ronald Nutt, Chief Executive 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, to my knowledge:

          (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 results of operations of the
     Company.

                                                    /s/ RONALD NUTT
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                       Ronald Nutt
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer

December 22, 2003
# C_2018436EN.01003701.xml

| 3.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 436/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 436/37

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 October 2018 — OY v Commission

(Case T-605/16)

((Civil service - Members of the contract staff - Article 3b of the CEOS - Recruitment - Classification in grade - Account taken of professional experience - General Implementing Provisions for Article 79(2) of the CEOS))

(2018/C 436/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: OY (represented by: N. Flandin and S. Rodrigues, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Berscheid, C. Berardis-Kayser and L. Radu Bouyon, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 270 TFEU and seeking, first, annulment of the decision of the Commission of 2 October 2015 rejecting the applicant’s request for a review of her classification in function group IV, grade 15, step 1 and, second, in so far as necessary, annulment of the decision of the AECE of 29 March 2016 rejecting the applicant’s complaint.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders OY to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders OY to pay the costs.

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CHRISTOPHER RENFRO,

Petitioner

- Appellant,

v.

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION;

et al.,

Respondent s

- Appellees. No. 19

- 16992

D.C. No. 1:19

- cv

- 00007

- AWI

- EPG

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 9, 2020 * *

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

.

Christopher Renfro appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his

mandamus action under 28 U.S.C. § 1361 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291. We review de novo. Watison v. Carter , 668 F.3d 1 108, 1112 (9th Cir.

2012) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)); Johnson v. Reilly , 349 F.3d

* 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 13 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 19

- 16992

1149, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003) ( determination of whether the elements for mandamus

relief are satisfied ). We affirm.

The district court properly denied Renfro’s petition for writ of mandamus

because Renfro failed to demonstrate an entitlement to mandamus relief. See

Lowry v. Barnhart , 329 F.3d 1019, 1021 (9th Cir. 2003) (setting forth elements for

mandamus relief and stating that “[i] f a plaintiff has no legal entitlement to the

relief sought, a ‘ clear and certain ’ claim cannot exist, and the writ will not lie ” ) ;

20 C.F.R. § 416.1413 ( procedures for requesting reconsideration of Social Security

Administration ’s (“ SSA”) initial determination of benefits and for opportunity to

review the file )

.

We reject as without merit Renfro’s contention that he is entitled to the

names and other identifying information of SSA employees.

We do not consider matters not specificall y and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief

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

.

AFFIRMED.
No. 51939.

#### F. J. Cazalas *v.*United States,

protest 127917-K/12800 (New Orleans).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protest.