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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

HARMINDER SINGH,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney

General

,

Respondent. No. 15

- 71620

Agency No. A088

- 347

- 459

MEMORANDUM *

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

Submitted May 17 , 202 2 * *

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Harminder Singh , a native and citizen of India , petitions for review of the

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

removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for

abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Cano

- Merida v. INS , 311

* 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

MAY 20 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 15

- 71620

F.3d 960, 964 (9th Cir. 2002). We deny the petition for review.

We previously denied Singh’s petition for review of the agency’s decision

that he was not eligible for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the

Convention Against Torture. Singh v. Holder

, 586 F. App’x 269 (9th Cir. 2014)

(unpu blished). We now conclude that the BIA did not abuse its discretion by

denying Singh ’s untimely motion to reopen. As the BIA determined, Singh did not

introduce previously unavailable , material evidence , and no exception to the filing

deadline for his motion to reopen otherwise applies

. 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C) ; 8

C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1); Young Sun Shin v. Mukasey , 547 F.3d 1019, 1025 (9th Cir.

2008) ( a pplicants seek ing to “ reopen proceedings to pursue r elief bear a ‘heavy

burden’ of proving that, if proceedings were reopened, the new evidence would

likely change the result in the case”) (quoting Matter of Coelho , 20 I. & N. Dec.

464, 473 (BIA 1992)).

The record does not support Singh’s contention that th e BIA failed to

consider the evidence he submitted with his motion to reopen or otherwise violated

his right to due process

. See F eng Gui Lin v. Holder , 588 F.3d 981, 987 (9th Cir.

2009) (“[A]lthough the BIA must consider a petitioner’s evidence of change d

country conditions, it need not expressly refute on the record every single piece of

evidence

. ”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
# C_2017374EN.01002602.xml

| 6.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 374/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 374/26

---

Judgment of the General Court of 21 September 2017 — Novartis v EUIPO — Meda (Zymara)

(Case T-214/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU word mark Zymara - Earlier EU word mark FEMARA - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 - Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 374/39)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Novartis AG (Basle, Switzerland) (represented by M. Douglas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by H. O’Neill, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Meda AB (Solna, Sweden)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 February 2015 (Case R 550/2014-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Novartis and Meda.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Novartis AG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Novartis AG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 205, 22.6.2015.

1

---
```

[115th Congress Public Law 242]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 2893]]

Public Law 115-242
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To designate the J. Marvin Jones Federal Building and Courthouse in 
Amarillo, Texas, as the ``J. Marvin Jones Federal Building and Mary Lou 
  Robinson United States Courthouse''. <<NOTE: Sept. 18, 2018 -  [H.R. 
                                5772]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The J. Marvin Jones Federal Building and Courthouse located at 205 
SE 5th Ave., Amarillo, Texas, shall be known and designated as the ``J. 
Marvin Jones Federal Building and Mary Lou Robinson United States 
Courthouse''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to 
the ``J. Marvin Jones Federal Building and Mary Lou Robinson United 
States Courthouse''.

    Approved September 18, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5772:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 115-819 (Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            July 16, considered and passed House.
            Sept. 4, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
(Reap. Dec. 9875)

#### Copease Corp. *v.*United States

Entry No. 952347, etc.

(Decided December 15, 1960)

*Eugene R. Pichrell*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Boub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Rao, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, attached to this decision and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States that the *596merchandise covered by the appeals for reappraisement set forth in Schedule “A”, attached hereto, consists of Sensitized Paper and Unsensitized Paper designated on the invoices as CpN, CpG or CpP, which was exported from Western Germany during the year 1966.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that during the year 1956 such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of Western Germany; that during the year 1956 such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Western Germany for export to the United States; and that during the year 1956 such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale in the principal market of the United States to all purchasers.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the “cost of production” as defined in Section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930 for such merchandise during 1956 was as follows:

> Invoice description Cost of production

> CpN Invoice unit values, less 20%, plus 34.65% packed

> CpG Invoice unit values, less 20% packed

> CpP Invoice unit values, less 20% packed

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appeals for reap-praisement are abandoned as to any other merchandise listed on the invoices, and that these appeals may be deemed to be submitted for decision on this stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were, during 1956, as follows:

> Invoice description Cost of production

> CpN Invoice unit values, less 20% plus 34.65% packed

> CpG Invoice unit values, less 20% packed

> CpP Invoice unit values, less 20% packed

As to all other merchandise listed on said invoices, the appeals for reappraisement having been abandoned, the same are dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
No. 74-5927.

#### Brown et al. *v.*Bounds, Correction Commissioner, et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 56691.

protests 180137-K, etc. (New York).

#### International Smelting and Refining Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Exhibit 32.1


             Skinovation Pharmaceutical Incorporated

                 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                      18 U.S.C. Section 1350

     I, John W. Peters, Principal Executive and Financial Officer of
Skinovation Pharmaceutical Incorporated certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

..    the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended
     June 30, 2003, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
     15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

..    the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
     the Company.



Date: July 30, 2003
                                      /s/ John W. Peters
                                     _________________________________________
                                     John W. Peters
                                     Principal Executive and Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 91 (Friday, May 11, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 26866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9135]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

United States Mint


Notification of United States Mint Coin Product Price Adjustments

SUMMARY: The United States Mint is increasing prices for the 2007 
American Eagle Platinum Proof and Uncirculated Coins.
    The United States Mint is increasing the prices for 2007 American 
Eagle Platinum Proof and Uncirculated Coins effective with these 
products' release date, scheduled for May 17, 2007. The price increase 
from last year is due to higher platinum metal costs. The new prices 
are effective May 17, 2007, when the United States Mint will commence 
selling the 2007 American Eagle Platinum Coins at the prices indicated 
below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               New 2007
                          Product                               price
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 One Ounce Platinum Proof Coin.........................    $1,599.95
2007 One-Half Ounce Platinum Proof Coin....................       809.95
2007 One-Quarter Ounce Platinum Proof Coin.................       439.95
2007 One-Tenth Ounce Platinum Proof Coin...................       229.95
2007 Four-Coin Platinum Proof Set..........................     2,949.95
2007 One Ounce Platinum Uncirculated Coin..................     1,489.95
2007 One-Half Ounce Platinum Uncirculated Coin.............       759.95
2007 One-Quarter Ounce Platinum Uncirculated Coin..........       399.95
2007 One-Tenth Ounce Platinum Uncirculated Coin............       189.95
2007 Four-Coin Platinum Uncirculated Set...................     2,769.95
------------------------------------------------------------------------


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gloria Eskridge, Associate Director 
for Sales and Marketing; United States Mint; 801 Ninth Street, NW.; 
Washington, DC 20220; or call 202-354-7500.

    Authority: 31 U.S.C. 5111, 5112 & 9701.

    Dated: May 8, 2007.
Edmund C. Moy,
Director, United States Mint.
 [FR Doc. E7-9135 Filed 5-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-02-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

                                                  
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-02-1997
<CASH>                                          50,717
<SECURITIES>                                    12,189
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,599
<ALLOWANCES>                                       441
<INVENTORY>                                     14,833
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               119,987
<PP&E>                                         131,788
<DEPRECIATION>                                  61,814
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 206,287
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,581
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,430
<OTHER-SE>                                     161,504
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   206,287
<SALES>                                        112,187
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,187
<CGS>                                           53,184
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   53,184
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (13)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  98
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 28,664
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,591
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             18,073
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,073
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .56
        

</TABLE>
No. 47644.

#### Protest 30271-K of Tice Import Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel the beaded bags in question were held dutiable at 50 percent under paragraph 411, as claimed, on the authority of Abstract 46773.
No. 45258.

#### Protest 27579-K of Ying Chong Lung Co. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Evans, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of chopped sar sum the same as that the subject of *Oy Wo Tong Co.*v. *United States*(C. D. 372). The claim at 10 percent under paragraph 34 was therefore sustained.
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

I, David J. Vander Zanden, President and Chief Executive Officer of School Specialty, Inc., certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the knowledge of the undersigned:



| | 1. | The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 26, 2008 (the Report) which this statement accompanies fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of School Specialty, Inc.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 24, 2008



/s/ David J. Vander ZandenDavid J. Vander ZandenChief Executive Officer


This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed as filed by School Specialty, Inc. for purposes of Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Exhibit 21.1

                   SUBSIDIARIES OF THE INTERCEPT GROUP, INC.

Consolidated subsidiaries


ProVesa Inc., a Georgia corporation ("ProVesa") and wholly-owned subsidiary of
         InterCept, doing business as "ProVesa" and "InterCept."

         ProVesa Services, Inc., a Georgia corporation and wholly owned
         subsidiary of ProVesa, doing business as "ProVesa" and "InterCept."

         ProImage, Inc., a Georgia corporation two-thirds owned by ProVesa,
         doing business as "ProVesa" and "InterCept."

         Item Processing of America, Inc., a Florida corporation and wholly
         owned subsidiary of ProVesa, doing business as "ProVesa" and
         "InterCept."

InterCept Switch, Inc., a Georgia corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of
         InterCept, doing business as "InterCept Switch."

InterCept Communications Technologies, Inc., a Georgia corporation and
         wholly-owned subsidiary of InterCept, doing business as "InterCept."

LEV Acquisition Corp., a Georgia corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of
         InterCept, doing business as "InterCept."


Unconsolidated subsidiaries

Netzee, Inc., a Georgia corporation in which InterCept owned approximately 37%
         as of December 31, 1999, doing business as "Netzee."
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 92 (Monday, May 14, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 27166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9164]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i> 10864 and <greek-i> 10865]


Massachusetts Disaster <greek-i> MA-00009

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a 
disaster for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts dated 5/07/2007.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding.
    Incident Period: 4/15/2007 through 4/19/2007.
    Effective Date: 5/7/2007.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 7/6/2007.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 2/7/2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster 
loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally 
announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties:
    Essex.
Contiguous Counties:
    Massachusetts: Middlesex, Suffolk.
    New Hampshire: Hillsborough, Rockingham.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeowners with Credit Available Elsewhere...................      5.750
Homeowners without Credit Available Elsewhere................      2.875
Businesses wth Credit Available Elsewhere....................      8.000
Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives without Credit        4.000
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) with Credit             5.250
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations without Credit             4.000
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 10864 B 
and for economic injury is 10865 0.
    The Commonwealth and State which received an EIDL Declaration 
<greek-i> are Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

    Dated: May 7, 2007.
Steven C. Preston,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E7-9164 Filed 5-11-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Exhibit 10.28.3



THIRD AMENDMENT

TO THE

COVENTRY HEALTH CARE, INC.

SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN

WHEREAS,Coventry Health Care, Inc. (the Company) maintains the Coventry Health Care, Inc. Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (the Plan); and

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9.1 of the Plan, the Company may amend the Plan at any time; and

WHEREAS,the Company wishes to amend the Plan, effective as provided below.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Plan is hereby amended as follows, effective as provided below:

1.            The name of the Plan is changed to The Coventry Health Care, Inc. 401(k) Restoration and Deferred Compensation Plan, effective as of December 1, 2006.

2.            Article IX of the Plan is amended, effective December 22, 2006, to read as follows:

ARTICLE IX.



AMENDMENT, MERGER AND TERMINATION OF PLAN

9.1
        Amendment of Plan


The Corporation, by action of its Chief Executive Officer, may at any time amend the Plan in whole or in part, provided, however, that no amendment shall be effective to decrease or restrict any Deferred Compensation Account maintained pursuant to any existing Deferred Compensation Agreement under the Plan.



9.2
        Merger of Plan


The Corporation, by action of its Chief Executive Officer, may at any time merge the Plan and its related Trust with another non-qualified plan maintained by the Employer or any member of a controlled group of corporations as defined in Code Section 1563 or a member of an affiliated service group as defined under Code Section 414(m).



9.3
        Termination of Plan


The Corporation, by action of the Compensation Committee of the Board, may at any time terminate the Plan with respect to new deferral elections, as to any Eligible Employee or in its entirety if, in the judgment of the Compensation Committee of the Board, the tax, accounting, or other effect of the continuance of the Plan, or any potential payment thereunder would not be in the best interest of the Employer.  If the Plan is terminated in its entirety or as to any Eligible Employee, each affected Participant shall be 100% vested in the value of his Deferred Compensation Account.



NY:1399107v2



---



Upon such termination, each Participant will receive the value of his Deferred Compensation Account in the form of a lump-sum payment to be made no later than 120 days following the termination date.



3.
        Except as provided above, the Plan remains in full force and effect.


The Company has caused this amendment to the Plan to be executed by its duly authorized officer this 24th day of January, 2007.

COVENTRY HEALTH CARE, INC.




By:  /s/ Dale B. Wolf


Title: Chief Executive Officer






NY:1399107v2
        - 2 -