alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6328
MARK STEVEN STANTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LOWELL WOOD, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-98-889-5-H) Submitted: May 11, 1999 Decided: May 25, 1999Before HAMILTON and KING, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark Steven Stanton, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Mark Steven Stanton appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Stanton v. Wood , No. CA-98-889-5-H (E.D.N.C. Feb. 25, 1999). 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

INGRID JANETH CERRATO-PINEDA; et 

al., 

Petitioners, 

 v. 

MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting 

Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 18-70588 

Agency Nos. A202-080-950 

A202-080-951 

A208-751-492 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 15, 2019**

Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges. 

Ingrid Cerrato-Pineda and her family, natives and citizens of Honduras, 

petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing their 

appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their application for asylum, 

 

* 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 17 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-70588 

withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence 

the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th 

Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.

Petitioners do not challenge the agency’s denial of Cerrato-Pineda’s son’s

separate asylum application. See Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 

n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening brief resulted in waiver).

Cerrato-Pineda testified that her ex-husband raped her, and that she suffered 

other physical attacks and verbal harassment. Substantial evidence supports the 

agency’s finding that Cerrato-Pineda did not establish the Honduran government 

was unwilling or unable to protect her from her ex-husband. See Rahimzadeh v. 

Holder, 613 F.3d 916, 920 (9th Cir. 2010) (applicant bears the burden of 

establishing that abuse was committed by the government or an agent 

the government is unwilling or unable to control). Thus, petitioners’ asylum claim 

fails. 

In this case, because Cerrato-Pineda did not establish eligibility for asylum, 

she did not establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Zehatye, 453 F.3d 

at 1190. Thus, her withholding of removal claim fails. 
3 18-70588 

Finally, substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief 

because Cerrato-Pineda failed to show it is more likely than not she would be 

tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Honduran government. See 

Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
EXHIBIT 10.49

                                                            Royal Bank of Canada
                                                   Commercial Financial Services
                                                  6880 Financial Drive 2nd Floor
                                                    Mississauga, Ontario L5N 7Y5
                                                            Tel.: (905) 286-7292
                                                             Fax: (905) 286-7279
RBC LOGO OMITTED
August 21, 2009

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

ESW CANADA INC.
335 Connie Crescent
Concord, Ontario
L4K 5R2

We refer to the agreement dated March 2, 2007 between ESW Canada Inc., as the
Borrower, and Royal Bank of Canada, as the Bank, (the "AGREEMENT").

All capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning
ascribed to them in the Agreement.

The Agreement is amended as follows:

1.   Under the Availability section, Facility #1 is amended by deleting "June
     30, 2009" and by substituting "April 30, 2010".

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
The effectiveness of this amendment is conditional upon receipt of a duly
executed copy of this amending agreement.

COUNTERPART EXECUTION
This amending agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts and by
different parties in separate counterparts, each of which when so executed shall
be deemed to be an original and all of which taken together constitute one and
the same instrument.

All other terms and conditions outlined in the Agreement remain unchanged and in
full force and effect.

This amending agreement is open for acceptance until September 18, 2009, after
which date it will be null and void, unless extended in writing by the Bank.

ROYAL BANK OF CANADA

Per:
    --------------------------------
Name:
Title:

Agreed to and accepted this ______ day of ____________, 2009.
ESW CANADA INC.

Per:

Name:
Title:
Per:

Name:
Title:
I/We have the authority to bind the Borrower

-----------------
(R) Registered Trademark of Royal Bank of Canada
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 740 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 740

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand school choice 
 opportunities for children of active duty members of the Armed Forces 
                         of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 24, 2019

 Mr. Wilson of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand school choice 
 opportunities for children of active duty members of the Armed Forces 
                         of the United States.

    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 ``Military Child Educational Freedom 
Act''.

SEC. 2. SPECIAL RULE FOR HOME SCHOOLS OF ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY.

    (a) In General.--Section 530(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(D) Special rule for home schools of active duty 
                members of the armed forces of the united states.--For 
                purposes of clauses (i) and (iii) of subparagraph (A), 
                if either the taxpayer or the spouse of the taxpayer is 
                serving on extended active duty (within the meaning of 
                section 32(c)(4)) in the Armed Forces of the United 
                States at the time the expense is incurred, the terms 
                `public, private, or religious school' and `school' 
                shall include any home school which provides elementary 
                or secondary education if such school is treated under 
                State law as a home school or a private school.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Jeffrey Allen ALCORN v. STATE of Louisiana, Through STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION.

No. 60830.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 21, 1977.

In re: Jeffrey Allen Alcorn applying for supervisory writs.

Not considered. Application not timely filed in the court. Rule 10, Section 5, Louisiana Supreme Court Rules.

*904TATE, J.,

concurs. Applicant did not file here within 10 days of the court of appeal denial. The applicant may, however, renew his application by securing a time delay from the district court within which to apply to this court.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JACKSON PRYOR GROUP, a California limited liability company,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

MANUEL LIMA, as Trustees of the Trust established under Declaration dated January 13, 1994; SUSANNE LIMA, as Trustees of

the Trust established under Declaration dated January 13, 1994,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 22

- 16899

D.C. No. 5:22

- cv

- 00111

- SVK

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California Susan G. Van Keulen, Magistrate Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 16, 2023 * *
San Jose, California

Before: MURGUIA, Chief Judge, and PAEZ and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Jackson Pryor Group brings a narrow appeal, challenging the dismissal of its

* 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 20 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

Complaint only to the extent the dismissal was on the merits rather than for lack of

jurisdiction

. Because there is no error in the district court’s dismissal order

, we

affirm.

As Jackson Pryor Group itself argues , the district court was “crystal clear”

that it was declining to exercise jurisdiction

. In dismissing under Am erican

Int ernational Underwriters (Philippines), Inc. v. Cont inental Ins urance Co

., 843

F.2d 1253 (9th Cir. 1988) , the district court appropriately stated that it was

applying “a narrow exception to the [c] ourt’s duty to exercise its jurisdiction .”

Jac kson Pryor argues that the district court should have clarified that this

was not a decision on the merits that would bind a state court. But n o further

clarification from the district court was needed

. See Guzman v. Polaris Indus. Inc.

,

49 F.4th 1308 , 1314 (9th Cir. 2022) (explaining that “ a federal court ’ s pre

- merits

determination to withhold relief is binding on other federal courts, but not on

courts outside the federal system that might properly exercise their own

jurisdiction over the claim ”); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (stating that a dismissal

“for lack of jurisdiction” generally does not “operate[] as an adjudication on the

merits”)

.

AFF I RMED.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 725 

To amend chapter 85 of title 5, United States Code, to clarify that Federal 

employees excepted from a furlough are eligible for unemployment compensation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 23, 2019 

Mrs. DINGELL (for herself and Mr. UPTON) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend chapter 85 of title 5, United States Code, to 

clarify that Federal employees excepted from a furlough 

are eligible for unemployment compensation, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pay Federal Workers 

5 Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 725 IH

1 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY FOR UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 

2 FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES EXCEPTED FROM 

3 FURLOUGH. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 8502 of title 5, United 

5 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol6 lowing: 

7 ‘‘(f)(1) With respect to any lapse in appropriations 

8 beginning on or after December 22, 2018, each excepted 

9 Federal employee shall be, solely for the purpose of deter10 mining eligibility for unemployment compensation under 

11 this subchapter, deemed for the duration of the lapse in 

12 appropriations to be— 

13 ‘‘(A) totally separated from Federal service; and 

14 ‘‘(B) eligible for unemployment compensation 

15 benefits under this subchapter with no waiting pe16 riod for such eligibility to accrue. 

17 ‘‘(2) In this subsection, the term ‘excepted Federal 

18 employee’ means a Federal employee who— 

19 ‘‘(A) is an excepted employee or an employee 

20 performing emergency work, as such terms are de21 fined by the Office of Personnel Management; and 

22 ‘‘(B) is not being paid due to a lapse in appro23 priations.’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 725 IH

1 (b) APPLICATION.—The amendment made by sub2 section (a) shall apply to weeks of unemployment begin3 ning on or after December 22, 2018. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
#### Kenneth Ray WRIGHT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 43852.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Sept. 20, 1973.

Appeal dismissed. 271 So.2d 771.

CARLTON, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
261 La. 220

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Benjamin Frank KENT.

No. 52277.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 22, 1972.

In re: The State of Louisiana applying for writ of certiorari.

Writ granted. (See order).

The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is ordered that a writ of certiorari issue herein, directing the Honorable Matthew S. Braniff, Judge of the Criminal District Court, Section “B”, for the Parish of Orleans, to transmit to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on or before the 8th day of June, 1972, the record in duplicate, or a certified copy of the record in duplicate, of the proceedings complained of by the relator herein, to the end that the validity of said proceedings may be ascertained.

It is further ordered that the aforesaid Judge of said Court and the respondent through counsel shall show cause, in this court, on the date aforesaid, at 11 o’clock A.M., why the relief prayed for in the petition of the relator should not be granted.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration #15557 and #15558; New Hampshire Disaster Number NH-00042]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of New Hampshire (FEMA-4370-DR), dated 06/08/2018. *Incident:*
                         Severe Storm and Flooding. *Incident Period:*
                         03/02/2018 through 03/08/2018.
 DATES: Issued on 06/08/2018. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         08/07/2018. *Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         03/08/2019.
 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, (202) 205-6734.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 06/08/2018, Private Non-Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature may file disaster loan applications 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:*
                     Rockingham The Interest Rates are: Percent*For Physical Damage:*Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500*For Economic Injury:*Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
2.500
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 155576 and for economic injury is 155580. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008) Rafaela Monchek, Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. 2018-13106 Filed 6-18-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
**Exhibit 23.1**
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos.333-102122 333-71608, and 333-121732) and in the related Prospectuses, and on Form S-8 pertainingto the 1989 Incentive Stock Plan and the 1992 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (No. 333-07707), the1998 Incentive Stock Plan (No. 333-59633), the 2001 Nonstatutory Stock Plan and Employee StockPurchase Plan (No. 333-42644), the 2001 Director Option Plan (No. 333-63398), the Calydon, Inc.Management Incentive and Retention Plan, as amended (No. 333- 71606), the 2001 Nonstatutory StockOption Plan and the 2002 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (No. 333-91796), and the 2002 Employee StockPurchase Plan and the 1998 Incentive Stock Plan (No. 333-1087) of Cell Genesys, Inc. of our reportsdated February 24, 2005, with respect to the consolidated financial statements, management’sassessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectivenessof internal control over financial reporting of Cell Genesys, Inc, included in this Annual Report(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.     /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Palo Alto, California
PUBLIC 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

COMMISSIONERS: Joseph J. Simons, Chairman 

Noah Joshua Phillips 

Rohit Chopra 

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter 

Christine S. Wilson 

In the Matter of 

The Procter & Gamble Company, 

a corporation 

and 

Billie, Inc. 

a c01poration. 

Docket No. 9400 

PUBLIC 

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT 

This matter comes before the Commission on Complaint Counsel and Respondents' Joint 

Motion to Dismiss Complaint. Having considered the motion, it is hereby ORDERED: 

The Joint Motion to Dismiss Complaint, dated Januaiy 6, 2021, is GRANTED; 

and the complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. 

By the Commission. 

~la~ 

Acting Secretaiy 

SEAL: 

ISSUED: Januaiy 8, 2021
Exhibit 99.1



INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS REPORT



We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of First West Virginia Bancorp, Inc. and its subsidiary as of September
30, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated statements of changes in stockholders equity, and cash flows for the nine-month period then ended and the consolidated statements of income for the nine and three-month period then ended. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.



We conducted our reviews in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial data
and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, the objective of
which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.



Based on our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying financial statements for them to be in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.



We
have previously audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2002, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in
stockholders equity and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in our report dated February 7, 2003, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ S.R. Snodgrass A.C.
|                       
|                       
|Wheeling, West Virginia
|November 10, 2003      



S.R.
Snodgrass, A.C.

980 National Road Wheeling, WV 26003-6400 Phone: 304-233-5030 Facsimile: 304-233-3062



35
Exhibit 12

                    Fleming Companies, Inc.
       Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                16 Weeks Ended
                                              --------------------
                                              April 15,   April 17,
(In thousands of dollars)                          2000      1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                            <C>         <C>
Earnings:
 Pretax loss                                   $(43,265)   $(31,465)
 Fixed charges, net                              61,135      60,246

      Total earnings                           $ 17,870    $ 28,781

Fixed charges:
 Interest expense                              $ 53,101    $ 51,606
 Portion of rental charges
   deemed to be interest                          7,876       8,500
 Capitalized interest                               185           -

      Total fixed charges                      $ 61,162    $ 60,106

Deficiency                                     $ 43,292    $ 31,325

Ratio of earnings
  to fixed charges                                  .29         .48
</TABLE>

"Earnings" consists of income before income taxes and fixed
charges excluding capitalized interest.  Capitalized
interest amortized during the respective periods is added
back to earnings.

"Fixed charges, net" consists of interest expense, an
estimated amount of rental expense which is deemed to be
representative of the interest factor and amortization of
capitalized interest.

The pro forma ratio of earnings to fixed charges is omitted
as it is not applicable.

Under the company's long-term debt agreements, "earnings"
and "fixed charges" are defined differently and amounts and
ratios differ accordingly.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.3

                      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned
certifies that this periodic report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.



Date:    February 9, 2006



                                                       Joseph A. Santangelo
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       Joseph A. Santangelo
                                                       Chief Financial Officer