alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In re the MARRIAGE OF Melbourne E. STONE, Appellant, and Ronda K. Stone, Appellee.

No. 87CA0351.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. III.

Dec. 17, 1987.

Elliott and Neuswanger, P.C., Nancy A. Neuswanger, Fort Collins, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

BABCOCK, Judge.

Melbourne E. Stone (father) appeals the trial court order increasing his child support obligation. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

Father’s marriage to Ronda K. Stone (mother) was dissolved in 1974. Mother received custody of the three children, then aged 8, 4, and 2, and father paid support of $60 per month per child. In 1980, support was increased to $66.66 per month per child.

In 1986, mother moved for increased support for the two unemancipated children, citing their increased needs and expenses. At that time mother’s gross monthly income was $2215, and father’s was $2344. The trial court applied the child support guidelines, § 14-10-115, C.R.S. (1987 Repl. Vol. 6B), and ordered father to pay a total of $494 per month.

Father first contends that the child support guidelines do not apply to his support obligation. We disagree.

The child support guidelines became effective November 1, 1986, and apply to child support obligations arising on or after that date. Colo.Sess. Laws 1986, ch. 120 at 729. Contrary to father’s arguments, we are not persuaded that the General Assembly intended to create a separate standard for modification of child support orders entered before November 1986. Child support obligations, whenever first ordered, continue to arise until the child’s emancipation. Moreover, any ambiguity in this regard was removed by the General Assembly during the 1987 General Session when it provided that:

> “This section [containing the child support guidelines] shall apply to all child support obligations, established or modified, as part of any proceeding, including, but not limited to, articles 5, 6, and 10 of this title and articles 5 and 6 of title 19, C.R.S., whether filed on, prior to, or subsequent to July 10, 1987.” Section 14-10-115(17), C.R.S. (1987 Repl.Vol. 6B).

Therefore, the trial court did not err in applying the guidelines to determine father’s obligatiQns after November 1, 1986.

*468Father next contends that the guidelines are inequitable as applied in this case. However, we perceive no inequity, and it appears that the trial court considered the relevant factors. *See*§ 14-10-115, C.R.S. (1987 Repl.Vol. 6B).

Father also contends that the trial court erred in treating certain psychological counseling as an extraordinary medical expense. We agree.

Section 14-10-115(12), C.R.S. (1987 Repl. Vol. 6B) allows counseling expenses only for diagnosed mental disorders. Here, there was no evidence of any diagnosis, so those expenses should not have been included in the support calculation. Thus, the $494 support order was $27 higher than that authorized by the statute.

The order is reversed as to the counseling expenses, and the cause is remanded for entry of an order for $467 per month child support. The order is affirmed in all other respects.

VAN CISE and STERNBERG, JJ., concur.
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-11-0486 SAT Date: 8/5/2011 Print Date: 8/31/2011

Related cases : Health related cases: Ecotox related cases :

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 2 1

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 1 1 PMN 3 1 1 Hyd Pdt

Exposure Based Review : Health: Ecotox: N o Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Inhalation Ecotox: N o releases to water Fate: ; Hyd Pdt negl Keywords : Keywords: ONCO; SENS-L,S; IRR-L,MM Summary of Assessment :
Fate : Fate Summary: P-11-0486 FATE: MW = 1100 with 0.9% < 500 and 28.1% < 1000 with MP < 25 C (E) S = Reacts Hydrolysis half-life = hr VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E) POTW removal (%) = PMN 90-99 via hydrolysis; then Hyd Pdt 90 via sorption Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = moSorption to soils/sediments = v.strong PBT Potential: PMN P1B1; Hyd Pdt P3B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

Health : Health Summary: Absorption of low molecular weight fractions (1% <500, 28% <1000) is poor all routes ( p che m ); expected to react, especially in the lung. Concern for oncogenicity based on 400, 70% <500, 90% <1000]; respiratory and dermal sensitization and lung and mucous membrane irritation based on the

Test Data: (-) Salmonella with and without activation; (-) E. coli with and without activation; rat oral LD0 = 2000 mg/kg; rat dermal LD0 = 2000 mg/kg; mild eye irritation in rabbits; mild skin irritation in rabbits; (+) for skin sensitization in a mouse local lymph node assay at >= 5% ai

Ecotox :

Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 * daphnid 48-h LC50 * green algal 96-h EC50 * fish

_ chronic value * daphnid

_ chronic value * algal

_ chronic value * Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value

_ Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for polymers; SAR chemical class = p olyme r MW 1100 with 28% < 1000 and 0.9% < 500; S = reacts with water at 20 C (P); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and nominal concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) *

SARs polymers SAR Class p olyme r

Ecotox Factors Comments:
SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BELICA YANIRA GUZMAN-ESCOBAR, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 15-71981 

Agency No. A200-627-534 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 13, 2018**

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Belica Yanira Guzman-Escobar, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions 

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from 

an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for asylum, withholding 

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

 

* 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

FEB 22 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-71981 

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 in the petition for review.

The record does not compel the conclusion that Guzman-Escobar established 

extraordinary or changed circumstances to excuse her untimely asylum application. 

See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.4(a)(4), (5); Toj-Culpatan v. Holder, 612 F.3d 1088, 1091-92 

(9th Cir. 2010). Thus, Guzman-Escobar’s asylum claim fails.

Guzman-Escobar does not challenge the agency’s finding that she failed to 

establish past persecution, and substantial evidence supports the agency’s 

conclusion that, even if Guzman-Escobar’s family constitutes a particular social 

group, she failed to establish a nexus between the harm she fears and a protected 

ground. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011) (even if 

membership in a particular social group is established, an applicant must still show 

that “persecution was or will be on account of his membership in such group” 

(emphasis in original)); see also Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 

2010) (“An [applicant’s] desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated 

by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected 

ground.”). Thus, her withholding of removal claim fails. 

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because 

Guzman-Escobar failed to show it is more likely than not that she will be tortured 
3 15-71981 

by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of Guatemala. See Aden 

v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
#### Manuel FEDERICO; Ronald E. Baird; Dean A. Cummings; Richard L. Goodnight; James A. Hall; Lee Higginbotham; Larry H. Hubler; Gale L. Donnelly; Elery H. Mefford; Donald K. Mefford; John A. Lauro; Floyd J. Mansfield; Theodore Jimenez; Leonard H. Johnson; Richard W. Lanter; Orson J. Matteson; Dorlin M. Thompson; Barry J. Todd; Harvey A. Williams; Jose E. Romo; Robert L. Saul; Joseph H. Marcus; Larry E. Owen; Ronald L. Owen; Rudolph L. Palomino; David Scheibley; Louis Siefford; George S. Sims; Ronald W. Stockley; and Eugene Romero, Petitioners, Cross-Respondents, v. BRANNAN SAND & GRAVEL CO., Respondent, Cross-Petitioner, and The Industrial Claim Appeals Office of the State of Colorado and the Division of Employment and Training for the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment; and Pedro C. Leal, Cross-Respondents.

No. 88SC587.

Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc.

March 20, 1989.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari GRANTED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6273

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LUELLEN DAVIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (CR-92-366, CA-96-85-20-6)

Submitted: June 11, 1996 Decided: June 25, 1996

Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Luellen Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew Raymond Hawley, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the

district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on

the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Davis, Nos.

CR-92-366; CA-96-85-20-6 (D.S.C. Feb. 1, 1996). 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.

DISMISSED
### ATTACHMENT 4 CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

NOTICE OF EXEMPTION

TO: County Clerk County of Ventura

800 South Victoria Avenue

Ventura, CA 93009

FROM: Ventura County Air Pollu tion Control District 669 County Square Drive

Ventura, CA 93003

DATE: April 8, 2008

Project Title: Revisions to Rule 74.29, Soil Decontamination Operations

Project Location -- Specific: District Wide

Project Location -- City: See above Project Location -- County: Ventura County

Description of Project:

The project expands the rule to include requi rements for the excavation, transportation, and handling of active and inactive soil. These re visions are required becau se, under the provisions of Health and Safety Code section 40914(b)(2), staff mu st provide for expeditious implementation of "every feasib le measure" to reduce ozone pr ecursor emissions. In addition,

the revision clarifies la nguage and adds defin itions where necessary.

Name of Public Agency Approving Project: Ventura County Air Pollu tion Control District Date Approved: April 8, 2008

Name of Person or Agen cy Carrying Out Project: Ventura County Air Pollu tion Control District

Exempt Status: The revisions to Rule 74.29 are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under S ections 15307 and 15308 of the state CEQA Guidelines and no exceptions to these exemptions apply.

Reasons Why Project Is Exempt: The revisions to Rule 74.29 are categorically exempt from the requirements of CEQA because reactive organic compound emissions from soil de contamination operati ons will be reduced with implementation of the revised rule.

Contact Person:

Donald R. Price Ventura County Air Pollu tion Control District Telephone: (805) 645-1407

Michael Villegas

Air Pollution Control Officer
g

p

p

Environmental Conservation, being duly sworn, state the following:

The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation did not receive any factual or other

substantive information that was submitted in writing as public comment and that was relevant tothe accuracy, coverage, or other aspect of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservationregulations on adopting changes to Title 18, Chapter 50 of the Alaska Administrative Code

The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation was not required by AS 44.62.218 to

prepare an economic effect statement or regulatory flexibility analysis regarding smallbusinesses for the above-described regulations]

/

1 .Kt’

cott Sloane, En onmental Program Specialist III

day of iLEB , zoo’? 

Not Public in and for theState of Alaska

My commission expires:r10 - to

Date: aa -

Juneau, A aska /

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this

STATE OF ALASKA

OFFICIAL SEAL

Ralph B. Erickson

NOTARY PUBLIC

My Commission Expires 05/10/10
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 21


                            LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF
                             WESTPOINT STEVENS INC.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                           % of Securities
                                                                                Owned by
Name                                        Incorporated                    Immed. Parent
----                                        ------------                   ---------------
<S>                                         <C>                            <C>
HTG Falcon LLC                                Georgia                          80.62%
West Stevens Inc. I                           Delaware                           100%
  J.P. Stevens & Co., Inc.                    Delaware                           100%
      WestPoint Stevens (Canada) Ltd.         Canada                             100%
      J.P. Stevens Enterprises, Inc.          Delaware                           100%
  Alamac Holdings Inc.                        Delaware                           100%
  Liebhardt Inc.                              Delaware                           100%
WestPoint Stevens (Asia) Inc.                 British Virgin Islands             100%
  WestPoint Stevens (Japan) Inc.              Japan                              100%
WestPoint Stevens Stores Inc.                 Georgia                            100%
WestPoint Stevens (UK) Limited                England                            100%
  WestPoint Stevens (Europe) Limited          England                            100%
      Lexward Properties Limited              England                            100%
      P.J. Flower Inc.                        New Jersey                         100%
      DPC Associates Limited                  England & Wales                    100%
WPS Receivables Corporation                   Delaware                           100%
WPSI Inc.                                     Delaware                           100%
</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 61 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 61

       Designating March 1, 2013, as ``Read Across America Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 27, 2013

    Mr. Reed (for himself and Ms. Collins) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
       Designating March 1, 2013, as ``Read Across America Day''.

Whereas reading is a basic requirement for quality education and professional 
        success, and is a source of pleasure throughout life;
Whereas the people of the United States must be able to read if the United 
        States is to remain competitive in the global economy;
Whereas Congress has placed great emphasis on reading intervention and on 
        providing additional resources for reading assistance, including through 
        the programs authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
        1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) and through annual appropriations for 
        library and literacy programs; and
Whereas more than 50 national organizations concerned about reading and 
        education have joined with the National Education Association to 
        designate March 1, the day before the anniversary of the birth of 
        Theodor Geisel (also known as Dr. Seuss), as a day to celebrate reading: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates March 1, 2013, as ``Read Across America 
        Day'';
            (2) honors Theodor Geisel, also known as Dr. Seuss, for his 
        success in encouraging children to discover the joy of reading;
            (3) honors the 16th anniversary of ``Read Across America 
        Day'';
            (4) encourages parents to read with their children for at 
        least 30 minutes on ``Read Across America Day'' in honor of the 
        commitment of the Senate to building a country of readers; and
            (5) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        ``Read Across America Day'' with appropriate ceremonies and 
        activities.
                                 <all>
```
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Logistics AgencyThe Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency

Search
Search

Search

-  Home		 
-  What DLA Offers    -  Excess Property Disposal             
  -  Document Services             
  -  Products             
  -  Services             
  -  Programs 
-  Working With DLA    -  Applications             
  -  Small Business             
  -  Federal and International Cataloging             
  -  Defense Data Standards             
  -  Events             
  -  Procurement Policies             
  -  Government Programs             
  -  Forms 
-  Organizations    -  DLA Headquarters             
  -  DLA Aviation             
  -  DLA Disposition Services             
  -  DLA Distribution             
  -  DLA Energy             
  -  DLA Land and Maritime             
  -  DLA Troop Support             
  -  DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM             
  -  DLA Europe & Africa             
  -  DLA Indo-Pacific 
-  Customer Support    -  Self Help Tools             
  -  How to Order             
  -  Find Your Order             
  -  Customer Facing Offices             
  -  Training             
  -  Brochures             
  -  Warfighter Support             
  -  Customer Service Management 
-  Careers		 
-  About DLA    -  Contact Us             
  -  Locations             
  -  Leaders             
  -  News             
  -  History             
  -  Media Gallery             
  -  DLA Campaigns 

HomeAbout DLAImages

# DLA Images

Search

Search

                                  - All Images 
                                  - Other 

                                  - Upload Date
                                  - Photo Date
                                  - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (1.03 MB)

Tags:

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
BEFORE THE 

UNITED STATES OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 

May 5, 2015 

Essential Air Service at 

.. , 

GREENVILLE, MISSISSIPPI OST -2008-0209 

Under 49 U.S.C. 41731 et seq. 

NOTICE OF INTENT OF SEAPORT AIRLINES TO 

TERMINATE SERVICE AT GREENVILLE, MISSISSIPPI 

SeaPort Airlines, Inc.· ("SeaPort"), pursuant to Part 323 of the Department's regulations, 

hereby provides 90-day notice of its intention to discontinue subsidized scheduled air service 

between Memphis, Tennessee and Greenville, Mississippi ("Greenville"). SeaPort intends to 

discontinue this service on August 5, 2015 or such earlier date as permitted by the 

Department. 

By Order 2014-10-21 dated October 24, 2014, the Department selected SeaPort to provide 

subsidized Essential Air Service at Greeiwille. Unfortunately, SeaPort is no longer able to 

provide this service for the reasons setforth below. 

First, the Federal Aviation Administration's new flight and duty limitations and the 

implementation of FAA Air Transportation Pilot ("ATP") 1,500 hours requirement for First 

Officers has created a nationwide shortage of pilots at Part 121 carriers. While SeaPort's 

operations are operated under Part 135, our operations have been impacted severely by 

recruitment of our pilots by Part 121 carriers. This has prevented us from operating at 

Greenville with a high-degree of schedule reliability. 
SEA(PORT 

====AIRLINES 

Second, on April 3, 2015, the Mayor of Greenville wrote the Department expressing his 

"disappointment" with SeaPort's "poorly executed start of service," noting that 9 out of 72 

flights were cancelled during the first two weeks of service. Notwithstanding that many 9f 

these cancellations were due to the reason stated above, most involved flights for which no 

passengers were booked. Given national pilot shortage, we continue to be faced with having 

to make tough choices with respect to the "highest and best use" for limited pilot resources. 

Third, traffic levels have been far below levels forecasted by SeaPort its proposal to provide 

EAS at Greenville. To illustrate this point, on the day prior to service launch SeaPort held of 

grand total of 16 reservations on all published flights departing Greenville. 1 We do not believe 

these numbers will reverse themselves in the near future, particularly when the Mayor's letter 

referenced above stated that the community would suspend all marketing and promotional 

efforts related to the new service. 

Therefore, given the acute national pilot shortage that is highly unlikely to abate anytime soon 

and the low traffic levels at Greenville, SeaPort is no longer able to provide EAS at Greenville. 

We request that the Department solicit proposals for replacement service on an expedited 

basis. Once a replacement carrier is selected, SeaPort will work the Department, community, 

and replacement carrier to facilitate an orderly transition. 

Timothy Sieber 

Executive Vice President 

SeaPort Airlines, Inc. 

May 5, 2015 

1 Advance bookings on March 15, 2015 for schedule published for sale through September 30, 2015. 

OST -2008-0209 

May 5, 2015 

Page 12