alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Aharonyan’s

request for oral argument is denied.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LALA AHARONYAN,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-70120

Agency No. A075-771-037

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 11, 2011** 

Before: THOMAS, SILVERMAN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges. 

Lala Aharonyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the

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

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the

FILED

AUG 17 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-70120

denial of a motion to reopen, Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir.

2005), and we deny the petition for review.

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

reopen as untimely because it was filed over five years after the BIA’s final order

of removal, see 8 C.F.R. 1003.2(c)(2) (motion to reopen must be filed within 90

days of final order of removal), and Aharonyan did not show she acted with the

due diligence required for equitable tolling, see Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889,

897 (9th Cir. 2003) (deadline for filing motion to reopen can be equitably tolled

“when a petitioner is prevented from filing because of deception, fraud, or error, as

long as the petitioner acts with due diligence”). Nor did Aharonyan demonstrate

changed country conditions to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit

for filing motions to reopen, see Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 996 (9th Cir.

2008); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(i). 

PETITION FOR REVIEWED DENIED.
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Andrew
A. Farina, Chief Financial Officer of Qualstar Corporation (the “Company”),
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:





(1) the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended June 30,
2008 (the “Report”) 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 780(d));
and





(2) the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
September 24, 2008





/s/ANDREW A.
      FARINAAndrew
      A. Farina,Principal
      Financial Officer
-80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

 37

 38

 39

 40

 41

★▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

06/16

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 16 Jun 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL
Table 4.  Estimates of the Total Housing Inventory for the
                United States:  Second Quarter 2005 and 2006

(Estimates are in thousands and may not add to total, due to rounding)


                                    Second    Second       90-Percent
                                   quarter   quarter Confidence Interval (�)a
                                                                             2006
Type                                 2005      2006    of 2006        of    Percent
                                   estimate  estimate  estimate  difference of total

All housing units.................  123,732   125,800       (X)        (X)       100

  Occupied........................  107,850   109,450       319        291        87
    Owner occupied................   73,974    75,227       629        431        60
    Renter occupied...............   33,876    34,223       538        415        27

  Vacant..........................   15,882    16,350       357        316        13
    Year-round vacant.............   11,970    12,376       350        301        10
      For rent....................    3,720     3,676       170        191         3
      For sale only...............    1,370     1,729       100        119         1
      Rented or sold,
      awaiting occupancy..........    1,073     1,186        75        104         1
      Held off market.............    5,807     5,785       246        214         5
        For occasional use........    1,946     1,850       142        125         1
        Temporarily occupied
        by persons with
        usual residence elsewhere.    1,112     1,204       115         98         1
        For other reasons.........    2,749     2,731       172        149         2

    Seasonal vacant...............    3,912     3,974       229        200         3
	
    aA 90-percent confidence interval is a measure of an estimate's reliability.  The larger the confidence interval is, 
in relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.
         (X)  Not Applicable.  Since the number of housing units is set equal to an independent national measure, there is 
no sampling error, and hence no confidence interval.
NOTE:  Since first quarter 2003, the Current Population Survey/Housing Vacancy Survey (CPS/HVS) estimates have been controlled 
to independent housing unit counts.  Doing so should make the CPS/HVS estimate of housing units more  comparable to other Census 
Bureau housing surveys.
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:?  U.S. DOT/FAA - Notice of proposed rulemaking Extension
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

April 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130025 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 130025 

 COA: 265029 

Midland CC: 03-001386-FH 

MARK WAYNE STEVENS, 03-001643-FH 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 18, 2005 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

KELLY, J., would hold this case in abeyance for People v Drohan, lv gtd 472 Mich 

881 (2005). 

s0424 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

April 28, 2006 

Clerk
#### Robert Lee AIKEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-537.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 6, 1973.

Appeal from Criminal Court of Record, Palm Beach County; James M. Reasbeck, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
# 312
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk April 29, 2013

p0422 

# Order

April 29, 2013

146448

ANDRE B. DAVIS,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 146448

COA: 307014

Genesee CC: 11

- 096525

- AA

EDWIN L. GULLECKSON, DEBORAH

PASCOL, and MCLAREN HOSPITAL,

Defendants

- Appellees.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 27, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
260 La. 1113

#### Ann Walls CONSTANT, Individually and as tutrix for her minor children Stacy D’Laine Constant, Douglas John Constant, Jr. and Elizabeth Annette Constant v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 52078.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 3, 1972.

In re: Ann Walls Constant, Individually and as Tutrix for her Minor Children, Stacy D’Laine Constant, Douglas John Constant, Jr., and Elizabeth Annette Constant, applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 255 So.2d 453.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.

Briefing is requested, as well as on the issues decided below, on what remedy is available to the plaintiff as the widow of a National Guardsman, and also as to whether, if workmen’s compensation is the remedy (See La.R.S. 29:39 prior to its repeal after this accident), amendment of the pleadings may be permitted. See La.C.C.P. Arts. 1153, 2164.
No. 11072.

#### Halpin *v.*Sloway.

Decided November 16, 1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Cuyahoga county.

*Mr. M. D. Herrick; Mr. J. C. Jones*and *Mr. Ross Hedges,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Thomas L. Gifford,*for defendant in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Summers, Davis- and Price, JJ., concur.
#### MIAMI GRAY LINE BOATS, INC., Appellant, v. MADISON SALES CORP., Appellee.

No. 66-402.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Feb. 14, 1967.

Scott, McCarthy, Steel, Hector & Davis and James H. Sweeny, III, Miami, for appellant.

Carl Spatz, Miami, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See: Mayflower, Inc. v. Suskind, Fla.App.1959, 112 So.2d 394; Southeastern Sales & Service Co. v. T. T. Watson, Inc., Fla.App.1965, 172 So.2d 239;. Wise v. Quina, Fla.App.1965, 174 So.2d 590; Jackson Grain Company v. Kemp, Fla.App.1965, 177 So.2d 513; 25 Fla.Jur., Pleadings, § 80.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 148 (Wednesday, August 1, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37490-37491]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16397]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 12496-002]


Rugraw, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement for the Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) 
regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has 
reviewed the application for license for the Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric 
Project (FERC No. 12496-002), to be located on the upper South Fork 
Battle Creek in Tehama County, California, and has prepared a draft 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project. The project would 
occupy no federal land or Indian reservations.
    The final EIS contains staff's evaluations of the applicant's 
proposal and the alternatives for licensing the proposed Lassen Lodge 
Hydroelectric Project. The final EIS documents the views of 
governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, affected Indian 
tribes, the public, the license applicant, and Commission staff.
    A copy of the final EIS is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Branch, Room 2A, located at 888 First Street NE, 
Washington, DC 20426. The final EIS also may be viewed on the 
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov under the eLibrary link. 
Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket 
number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC 
Online Support at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5b1d1e091814353732353e082e2b2b34292f1b3d3e2938753c342d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ffb9baadbcb0919396919aac8a8f8f908d8bbf999a8d9cd1989089">[email protected]</span></a>, (866) 208-3676 (toll 
free), or (202) 502-8659 (TTY).
    You may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances 
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC 
Online Support.
    For further information, contact Kenneth Hogan at (202) 502-8434 or 
at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eaa18f84848f9e82c4a2858d8b84aa8c8f9889c48d859c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4b002e25252e3f236503242c2a250b2d2e3928652c243d">[email protected]</span></a>.


[[Page 37491]]


    Dated: July 25, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-16397 Filed 7-31-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Dennis O’CONNOR, Appellant, v. Mary Louise O’CONNOR, Appellee.

No. 72-1439.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 13, 1973.

Rehearing Denied April 4, 1973.

Dennis M. O’Connor, in pro. per.

Miller & Russell, William Bailey, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, CHARLES CARROLL and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This interlocutory appeal, seeks to reverse, as excessive, an allowance of attorney’s fees made to a wife upon dissolution of marriage. We hold that the appellant has not sustained the burden of showing an abuse of discretion under the facts of this case.

*547An additional point on appeal does require that the trial court order be amended. Appellant points out, without contradiction by the appellee, that the record shows a $500.00 advance payment upon the attorney’s fee. This $500.00 payment was not credited against the total amount of the fee in setting the amount to be paid by appellant.

Thereupon, the order appealed is amended, at the end of paragraph number “2”, by the addition of the words: “except that the last monthly payment shall be $100.00.”

Appellant’s remaining points do not present reversible error.

The order appealed is amended and as amended is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             995
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,335
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,545
<INVENTORY>                                     51,150
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               104,318
<PP&E>                                          85,716
<DEPRECIATION>                                  49,439
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 148,769
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           41,920
<BONDS>                                         38,749
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            66
<OTHER-SE>                                      57,402
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   148,769
<SALES>                                        200,688
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               200,688
<CGS>                                          153,553
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  153,553
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                31,716
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   688
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,315
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,464
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,048
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,416
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,416
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.12
        

</TABLE>
Table 10.  Percent Distribution by Type of Unit for the United States and
                  for Inside and Outside MAs:  Fourth Quarter 1997 and 1996

(Percent distribution may not add to total, due to rounding)


                                                     Fourth quarter 1997
Type of housing unit
                                              United   Inside     Outside
                                              States     MAs        MAs

All housing units.........................       100        100        100

    Year-round vacant.....................       8.7        8.2       10.7
      For rent............................       2.6        2.7        2.1
      For sale only.......................       1.0        0.9        1.4
      Rented or sold, awaiting occupancy..       0.7        0.7        0.6
      Held off market.....................       4.4        3.8        6.6
        For occasional use................       1.6        1.2        2.8
        Temporarily occupied by persons
        with usual residence elsewhere....       0.7        0.7        0.7
        For other reasons.................       2.2        1.9        3.1

    Seasonal vacant.......................       2.8        1.6        7.1

    Occupied..............................      88.6       90.3       82.2


                                                     Fourth quarter 1996
Type of housing unit
                                              United   Inside     Outside
                                              States     MAs        MAs

All housing units.........................       100        100        100

    Year-round vacant.....................       8.7        8.3       10.3
      For rent............................       2.6        2.7        1.9
      For sale only.......................       1.0        1.0        1.1
      Rented or sold, awaiting occupancy..       0.7        0.7        0.6
      Held off market.....................       4.5        3.9        6.7
        For occasional use................       1.5        1.2        2.8
        Temporarily occupied by persons
        with usual residence elsewhere....       0.8        0.7        0.9
        For other reasons.................       2.2        1.9        3.1

    Seasonal vacant.......................       2.9        1.7        7.4

    Occupied..............................      88.4       90.0       82.3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                             963
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      713
<ALLOWANCES>                                       235
<INVENTORY>                                     12,090
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                15,767
<PP&E>                                          66,698
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,366
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 102,457
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,835
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            65
<OTHER-SE>                                      29,347
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   102,457
<SALES>                                         29,265
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                31,499
<CGS>                                            5,752
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,812
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,919
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    387
<INCOME-TAX>                                       147
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                240
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       240
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          20,400
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  626,400
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    533,300
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,417,300
<PP&E>                                       1,629,800
<DEPRECIATION>                               (919,300)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,779,100
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          970,700
<BONDS>                                        774,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       615,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     948,600
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,779,100
<SALES>                                      3,651,200
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,651,200
<CGS>                                        2,447,100
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,447,100
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             101,900
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                523,600
<INCOME-TAX>                                   187,700
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            335,900
<DISCONTINUED>                                  87,100
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   423,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.69
        

</TABLE>
#### Lee Charles MORRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-434.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 17, 1971.

Appeal from Criminal Court of Record, Orange County; Warren H. Edwards, Judge.

Appeal quashed.
#### Paul Robert JOHN, III, Appellant, v. Carol Erskine JOHN, Appellee.

No. 70-457.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 23, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.