alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MICHAEL PAUL HANDLESON,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

CORIZON REGIONAL MEDICAL DIRECTOR; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 19

- 35187

D.C. No. 1:17

- cv

- 00216

- BLW

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Idaho B. Lynn Winmill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 20, 2021 * *

Before: McKE OWN, CALLAHAN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.

Idaho state prisoner Michael Paul Handleson appeals pro se from the district
court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate

indifference to his serious medical needs . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s summary judgment for failure to

* 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

JAN 27 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 19

- 35187

exhaust administrative remedies

. Albino v. Baca , 747 F.3d 1162, 1168 (9th Cir.

2 014). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record

. Thompson v. Paul
, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058

- 59 (9th Cir. 2008)

. We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Handleson’s

claims against defendants Poulson, McCall, and Gelok because Handleson failed to

exhaust his administrative remedies, and failed to raise a genuine dispute of

material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable.

See Woodford v. Ngo , 548 U.S. 81, 90 (2006) (proper exhaustion requires “using

all steps that the agency holds out, and doing so properly (so that the agency
addresses the issues on the merits)” (citation and internal quotation marks

omitted)) ; s ee also Ross v. Blake , 136 S. Ct. 1850, 1859 (2 016) ( setting forth

circumstances when administrative remedies are effectively unavailable) ; Albino
,
747 F.3d at 1171

- 72 ( requiring inmates to exhaust administrative procedures prior

to filing suit in federal court)

. Summary judgment on Handleson’s claim against defendant Young was

proper because Handleson failed to f ile his action within the applicable statute of

limitations period. See Idaho Code § 5

- 219(4) (two

- year statute of limitations for

personal injury actions); Soto v. Swee tman , 882 F.3d 865, 871

- 72 (9th Cir. 2018)

( state tolling and statute of limitations for personal injury claims apply to § 19833 19

- 35187

claims ; federal law governs when a claim accrues, which is when a plaintiff knows

or should know of the injury that forms the ba sis for his cause of action).

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.
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION




QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10(b)  


  
 

  Consent of Independent Accountants    
  


We hereby consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form N-4 (File No. 333-68551) of our report dated March 1, 2001, relating to
the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Protective Life Insurance Company and Subsidiaries, which appears in such Registration Statement. We also consent to the use
in this Registration Statement of our report dated March 22, 2001, on our audits of the financial statements of The Protective Variable Annuity Separate Account, which appears in such
Registration Statement. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading "Independent Accountants" in such Registration Statement. 


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Birmingham, Alabama

April 30, 2001 









QuickLinks


Consent of Independent Accountants
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8906 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8906

  To amend titles 18 and 38, United States Code, to permit the lawful 
   carrying of firearms in properties under the jurisdiction of the 
        Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 28, 2024

   Mr. Rosendale (for himself, Mr. Norman, Mr. Clyde, Mr. Crane, Mr. 
Ogles, Mr. Brecheen, Ms. Boebert, Mr. Moore of Alabama, Mr. Babin, and 
Mr. Good of Virginia) introduced the following bill; which was referred 
to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on 
 Veterans' Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend titles 18 and 38, United States Code, to permit the lawful 
   carrying of firearms in properties under the jurisdiction of the 
        Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Veterans Gun Rights Protection Act 
of 2024''.

SEC. 2. POSSESSION OF FIREARMS.

    Section 930(d) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2) by striking ``or'' after the 
        semicolon;
            (2) in paragraph (3) by striking the period and inserting 
        ``; or''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(4) the otherwise lawful carrying of a firearm by an 
        individual on property under the jurisdiction of the Department 
        of Veterans Affairs, to the extent consistent with section 901 
        of title 38 and not prohibited by any law of the State or of 
        any political subdivision of the State in which the property is 
        located.''.

SEC. 3. AUTHORITY TO PRESCRIBE RULES FOR CONDUCT AND PENALTIES FOR 
              VIOLATIONS.

    Section 901 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(g)(1) The otherwise lawful possession of a firearm on Department 
property, consistent with the laws of the State and of all political 
subdivisions of the State in which the Department property is located, 
shall not be a violation of this section or any regulation prescribed 
under this section.
    ``(2) In this subsection, the term `firearm' has the meaning 
specified for the purposes of section 930 of title 18.''.
                                 <all>
```
Case: 2:10-cv-00965-EAS-TPK Doc #: 54 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 1 of 8  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:10-cv-00965-EAS-TPK Doc #: 54 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 2 of 8  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:10-cv-00965-EAS-TPK Doc #: 54 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 3 of 8  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:10-cv-00965-EAS-TPK Doc #: 54 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 4 of 8  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:10-cv-00965-EAS-TPK Doc #: 54 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 5 of 8  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:10-cv-00965-EAS-TPK Doc #: 54 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 6 of 8  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:10-cv-00965-EAS-TPK Doc #: 54 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 7 of 8  PAGEID #: <pageID>

Case: 2:10-cv-00965-EAS-TPK Doc #: 54 Filed: 01/13/12 Page: 8 of 8  PAGEID #: <pageID>

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2015-05-08T15:54:23-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
No. 54134.

#### Schenley Import Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 132116-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols*& *Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
<PAGE>

                                EXHIBIT (10)(a)


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
<PAGE>

                        Consent of Independent Auditors



We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Independent Auditors"
in the Statement of Additional Information and to the use of our reports (1)
dated February 2, 2001 with respect to the subaccounts of AUSA Endeavor Variable
Annuity Account which are available for investment by contract owners of The
Endeavor Variable Annuity, and (2) dated February 15, 2001 with respect to the
statutory-basis financial statements and schedules of AUSA Life Insurance
Company, Inc., included in Post-Effective Amendment No. 12 to the Registration
Statement (Form N-4 No. 33-83560) and related Prospectus of AUSA Landmark
Variable Annuity, formerly known as The Endeavor Variable Annuity.


                                       Ernst & Young LLP

Des Moines, Iowa
April 24, 2001
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 this Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 1) to the quarterly report of G2 Ventures, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 7, 2009 (the Report), I, Gust Kepler, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                       
|-------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Gust Kepler                                        
|Gust Kepler                                            
|Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
|August 7, 2009                                         

A signed original of this certification 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.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Raul Rodriguez v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-12-00688-CR

Trial court case number: 1348372

Trial court: 178th District Court of Harris County

The State has filed an Unopposed Motion to Designate Issues for Oral Argument. The 

motion is GRANTED as follows: while the panel may make inquiries regarding any of the issues 

presented, the panel would like the focus of the argument to be on issues 1 through 4.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: March 18, 2014
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2015-2775 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2015-CE-021-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit 10.95.1

SCHEDULE IDENTIFYING SUBSTANTIALLY IDENTICAL AGREEMENT(S)  TO EXHIBIT 10.95
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Facility Lease Agreement (T2), dated as of December 15, 1999, between Collins
Trust II, as Owner Lessor, and Collins Holdings EME, LLC, as Facility Lessee.

                  This Facility Lease Agreement differs from Exhibit 10.95 in
the following respects:

         In the Definitions section - Section 1, (T1) is replaced by (T2).

         In Section 3.5, "Account No. 50356-0" is replaced by "Account No.
         50357-0"

Facility Lease Agreement (T3), dated as of December 15, 1999, between Collins
Trust III, as Owner Lessor, and Collins Holdings EME, LLC, as Facility Lessee.

                  This Facility Lease Agreement differs from Exhibit 10.95 in
the following respects:

         In the Definitions section- Section 1, (T1) is replaced by (T3).

         In Section 3.5, "Account No. 50356-0" is replaced by "Account No.
         50358-0"


Facility Lease Agreement (T4), dated as of December 15, 1999, between Collins
Trust IV, as Owner Lessor, and Collins Holdings EME, LLC, as Facility Lessee.

                  This Facility Lease Agreement differs from Exhibit 10.95 in
the following respects:

         In the Definitions section - Section 1, (T1) is replaced by (T4).

         In Section 3.5, "Account No. 50356-0" is replaced by "Account No.
         50359-0"
No. 55378.

#### Pan American Import Export Co. *v.*United States,

protest 136353-K (Tampa).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

The protest was dismissed.
#### Jane C. Coleman, *Respondent, v.*Oliver C. Wright, Appellant, *Impleaded, etc.*

— Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by Barker, J.
#### Alfred J. Pingold, *Respondent, v.*Phoebe B. Allen, *Appellant.*

— Judgment reversed, new trial granted, costs to abide event. Opinion by Davis, P. J.
Before the Third Division,

July 16, 1940

No. 44109.

#### Protests 32049-K, etc., of Georges Mouracade & Fils (New York).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *United States*v. *Sahadi*(23 C. C. P. A. 293, T. D. 48165) the apricot paste or pulp in question was held dutiable at 35 percent under paragraph 735 as claimed, and green olives in brine at 20 cents per gallon under paragraph 744 following *Skourtsis*v. *United States*(T. D. 48218).
No. 53113.

#### Hercules Liquor Products Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 81705-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained. The protests were overruled in all other respects.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

Certification of Principal Financial Officer

 

I, Howard M.Nathan, certify that:

 

1)              I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of The Washtenaw Group, Inc.;

 

2)              Based on myknowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

 

3)              Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

 

4)              The registrant’sother certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) [Intentionally Omitted] for the registrant andwe have:

 

a)              designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

 

b)             [IntentionallyOmitted];

 

c)              evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

d)             disclosed in thisquarterly report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting;

 

5)              The registrant’sother certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

 

a)              all significantdeficiencies and material weakness in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b)             any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 
| Date: May 13,  2005                         |
|---------------------------------------------|
|                                        |
| /s/ Howard M.  Nathan                       |   |
| Vice President  and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
From: "Matt Todd" <ToddM@api.org> 

To: Brenda Shine/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: Jan Tierney/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, "John Wagner" <Wagner@api.org> 

Date: 01/28/2010 03:38 PM 

Subject: Cooling Tower Monitoring 

Brenda, 

 

Attached are supplemental comments in response to issues raised during our conference call in 

December on the cooling tower monitoring. Let me know if you have any follow up questions. 

 

Thanks, 

 

Matt 

Matthew Todd 

API 

1220 L Street NW 

Washington DC 20005 

202.682.8319 

www.api.org
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE CITY OF SEATTLE , Petitioner/Cross

- Respondent ,
v. STEVEN GREGORY LONG , Respondent/Cross

- Petitioner

. No. 78230

- 4

- I

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, WITHDRAWING OPINION, AND SUBSTITUTING OPINION

Respondent/Cross

- Petitioner Steven Long filed a motion for reconsideration of the opinion filed on May 4, 2020. Petitioner/Cross

- Respondent City of Seattle filed a response. The court has determined that the motion should be denied. However, the opinion should be withdrawn, and a substitute opinion filed. Now, therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration is denied; and it is furthe r ORDERED that the opinion filed on May 4, 2020, is withdrawn; and it is
further ORDERED that a substitute opinion shall be filed.
Physical and Chemical Properties of Oleylamine HCL

The following reported physical

– Chemical properties as reported on the Chemical Properties Worksheet are sited from data provided for the Oleylamine precursor for Oleylamine HCL as found in the EPA aHazard Characterization Document “Screening Level Hazard Characterization/ Fatty Nitrogen Derived Amines Category” September, 2010. See Table 6 on pages 19 and 20. The Oleylamine HCL produced by the submitter is produced in a dilute aqueous (acidic) solution for use as an emulsifier in the production of aqueous asphalt emulsions. It is not isolated in its ne a t state. In solution, oleylamine it is expected to exist in a pH depend ent equilibrium with its precursor oleylamine. Oleylamine is being used as a surrogate to support relevant physical chemical properties for oleylamine HCL.
Prepared by MERRILL CORPORATION




QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10(b)  


  
 

  Consent of Independent Accountants    
  


We hereby consent to the use in this Registration Statement on Form N-4 (File No. 33-70984) of our report dated March 1, 2001, relating to
the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules of Protective Life Insurance Company and Subsidiaries, which appears in such Registration Statement. We also consent to the use
in this Registration Statement of our report dated March 22, 2001, on our audits of the financial statements of The Protective Variable Annuity Separate Account, which appears in such
Registration Statement. We also consent to the reference to us under the heading "Independent Accountants" in such Registration Statement. 


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Birmingham, Alabama

April 30, 2001 









QuickLinks


Consent of Independent Accountants