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).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOSE AYALA MACIEL,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-72807

Agency No. A075-739-629

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 25, 2010** 

Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Jose Ayala Maciel, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to

reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

FILED

JUN 09 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-72807

review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Iturribarria v. INS,

321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the

petition for review. 

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

reopen as untimely because it was filed more than 90 days after the BIA’s final

order of removal and Ayala Maciel failed to demonstrate that he qualified for any

exceptions to the 90-day time limit. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to

reopen must be filed within ninety days of final administrative order of removal); 8

C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3) (listing exceptions to the time limitation).

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s decision not to invoke its sua 

sponte authority to reopen proceedings under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a). See Ekimian v. 

INS, 303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir. 2002).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
#### In the Matter of Thomas Bonilla, Appellant, v L.B. Grenis, as Director of the Temporary Release Program at Fishkill Correctional Facility, Respondent.

Casey, J.

Appeal (transferred to this court by order of the Appellate Division, Second Department) from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Benson, J.), entered March 29, 1990 in Dutchess County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, adhered upon reargument to its prior decision dismissing the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Petitioner, an inmate at Fishkill Correctional Facility in Dutchess County, applied for temporary release on October 27, 1989. He was ruled ineligible pursuant to 7 NYCRR 1900.4 (c) (4) (ii) *(a),*which bars an inmate from participation in temporary release if there is "concurrent and/or consecutive commitment to a local N.Y.S. jurisdiction for a definite sentence (unless the sentencing court has indicated in writing that *549there is no objection to the inmate’s participation in temporary release programs)”. Petitioner filed an administrative appeal and shortly thereafter commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to annul the initial determination denying his application. Petitioner contended that since both his commitment to the State jurisdiction for the indeterminate sentence and his commitment to the local jurisdiction for the definite sentence were imposed by the same sentencing court, 7 NYCRR 1900.4 (c) (4) (ii) *(a)*is not applicable and, therefore, he is not ineligible for participation in the temporary release program. Supreme Court dismissed the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and failure to state a cause of action. Petitioner appeals.

We agree with respondent that this appeal should be dismissed as moot. The sentencing court failed to respond within 30 days to an official communication concerning petitioner’s participation in the temporary release program and, therefore, by the express terms of the regulation, no objection exists *(see,*7 NYCRR 1900.4 [c] [4] [ii] *[c]).*Since this 30-day period expired on or about November 24, 1989, the challenged regulation no longer bars petitioner’s participation in the temporary release program. Petitioner’s status concerning his eligibility to participate in the temporary release program cannot, therefore, be affected by any relief we could grant on this appeal, making petitioner’s argument concerning the scope of the regulation purely academic. Since this matter does not present a recurring issue of public interest that otherwise would escape appellate review, dismissal of the appeal is appropriate *(see, Matter of Graham v Scully,*113 AD2d 990, 991).

Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 241 (Monday, December 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 87481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27696]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12289]


Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Object Being 
Imported for Exhibition--Determinations: ``Weaving Abstraction in 
Ancient and Modern Art'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby determine that a certain object being imported from abroad 
pursuant to an agreement with its foreign owner or custodian for 
temporary display in the exhibition ``Weaving Abstraction in Ancient 
and Modern Art'' at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, 
and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, 
is of cultural significance, and, further, that its temporary 
exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in 
the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these 
determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6471; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c8bbadabbca1a7a6fafcfdf188bbbca9bcade6afa7be"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3c4f595f485553520e0809057c4f485d4859125b534a">[email protected]</span></a>). The mailing address is U.S. 
Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, 
Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 
2021.

Nicole L. Elkon,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2023-27696 Filed 12-15-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2020137EN.01004503.xml

| 27.4.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 137/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137/45

---

Order of the President of the Court of 6 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Alicante — Spain) — Banco Santander, SA v VF, WD

(Case C-691/19) (1)

(2020/C 137/71)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 423, 16.12.2019.

---
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




Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies that
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 of
Advanced Cell Technology, Inc. (the “Company”) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.




Date:
      August 14, 2009/s/
      William M. Caldwell, IVWilliam
      M. Caldwell, IV, Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer and Principal Financial
  Officer)
# C_2010063EN.01001901.xml

| 13.3.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/19

---

Order of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 9 December 2009 — Prana Haus GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-494/08 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Article 119 of the Rules of Procedure — Community trade mark — Word mark PRANAHAUS — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character - Appeal manifestly inadmissible in part and manifestly unfounded in part)

2010/C 63/28

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Prana Haus GmbH (represented by: N. Hebeis, Rechtsanwalt)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: J. Weberndörfer, Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the Court of First Instance (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 17 September 2008 in Case T-226/07 Prana Haus GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) by which the Court of First Instance dismissed the action for annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 April 2007 dismissing the appeal against the Examiner's decision to refuse registration of the word mark PRANAHAUS for goods and services in classes 9, 16 and 35 — Descriptive character of the mark

Prana Haus GmbH

Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Prana Haus GmbH is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Prana Haus GmbH is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 32, 7.2.2009.

1

---
1

Please note: This policy may be revised as the situation develops.

BACKGROUND

Antigen capture immunoassays (ACIA) can be effective flock-based screening tools that have 

lower sensitivity than molecular assays but are highly specific for avian influenza when used for 

testing of clinically ill or dead birds. As screening tests, additional confirmatory testing is routine. 

Currently, there are commercially available licensed ACIA kits available. Testing at the National 

Veterinary Services Laboratories using 2014-2015 outbreak samples indicates a positive ACIA 

result in the presence of clinical signs consistent with HPAI is highly suggestive of infection and its 

use offers the potential of rapid detection at the farm level. However, due to the low sensitivity of 

these assays, molecular confirmation of negative results as well as positive results is required

when used during outbreak situations. 

GENERAL GUIDANCE

1. Collect duplicate tracheal/oropharyngeal and/or cloacal swab samples1from clinically ill or 

dead birds.

2. Perform ACIA test according to package insert on one set of samples. 

3. Regardless of ACIA test results, ship the second set of samples immediately to the National 

Animal Health Laboratory Network Laboratory (NAHLN) laboratory for additional testing, as 

false negatives are possible with the use of this test. Results of ACIA testing should be 

included on the sample submission form.

4. If the ACIA test results are either positive or weak positive, the flock meets the criteria for a 

suspect case (according to the H5/H7 AI Case Definition, August 31 2015) and the poultry 

veterinarian should immediately contact the State Veterinarian or VS Assistant Director in the 

State where the birds are located. The following information should be provided:

Owner and premises name

Premises address

Type and number of birds

5. When the flock meets the criteria for a presumptive positive HPAI case (according to the 

H5/H7 AI Case Definition, August 31 2015), the APHIS Administrator or Veterinary Services 

Deputy Administrator (Chief Veterinary Officer of the United States) or their designee will 

authorize APHIS personnel—in collaboration with State, Tribal, and Incident Command

personnel—to initiate depopulation, cleaning, and disinfection of the index case. Depopulation 

of poultry meeting the suspect case definition (e.g., a positive or weak positive ACIA result on

clinically ill or dead birds) may also be warranted depending on the epidemiological 

information; this action will be authorized by APHIS and State Animal Health Officials/Tribal 

officials. 

6. If the situation arises where the ACIA results are positive/weak positive and the PCR is 

negative, a second set of samples, including tissues, should be collected and submitted 

directly to the National Veterinary Services Laboratories for further testing. 

 

1 Refer to WI-AV-0020 http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/lab_info_services/downloads/WIAV0020.pdf

HPAI Outbreak 2014-2015

Use of the Antigen Capture Immunoassay

September 10, 2015
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

BIG BABOON, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

SAP AMERICA, INC., HP INC.,

Defendants-Appellees

______________________

2019-1928

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of California in No. 4:17-cv-02082-HSG, 

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

LANCE REICH, Kolesar & Leatham, Las Vegas, NV, argued for plaintiff-appellant. 

 J. CHRISTOPHER CARRAWAY, Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, 

Portland, OR, argued for defendants-appellees. Also represented by KLAUS H. HAMM. 

 ______________________

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

Case: 19-1928 Document: 57 Page: 1 Filed: 09/02/2020
ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

 PER CURIAM (DYK, O’MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit 

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

September 2, 2020 

Date

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court

Case: 19-1928 Document: 57 Page: 2 Filed: 09/02/2020
<TABLE> <S> <C>


          <ARTICLE> 5
          <LEGEND>
          THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
          FROM EIF HOLDINGS, INC. FORM 10-KSB FOR THE YEAR
          ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
          REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
          </LEGEND>
                 
          <S>                   <C>
          <PERIOD-TYPE>         12-MOS
          <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           SEP-30-1996
          <PERIOD-END>                                SEP-30-1996
          <CASH>                                          178,231
          <SECURITIES>                                          0
          <RECEIVABLES>                                 7,299,059
          <ALLOWANCES>                                    326,343
          <INVENTORY>                                     478,370
          <CURRENT-ASSETS>                              8,367,819
          <PP&E>                                        5,318,636
          <DEPRECIATION>                                4,043,549
          <TOTAL-ASSETS>                               10,575,503
          <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        14,074,967
          <BONDS>                                          73,882
          <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
          <PREFERRED>                                           0
          <COMMON>                                      3,019,246
          <OTHER-SE>                                   (6,592,592)
          <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 10,575,503
          <SALES>                                               0
          <TOTAL-REVENUES>                             27,537,589
          <CGS>                                        20,785,194
          <TOTAL-COSTS>                                20,785,194
          <OTHER-EXPENSES>                             11,551,845
          <LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
          <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              477,320
          <INCOME-PRETAX>                              (5,209,720)
          <INCOME-TAX>                                          0
          <INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (5,209,720)
          <DISCONTINUED>                                        0
          <EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0      
          <CHANGES>                                             0     
          <NET-INCOME>                                 (5,209,720)
          <EPS-PRIMARY>                                      (.25)
          <EPS-DILUTED>                                      (.25)
                           



</TABLE>
# **Exhibit 32**

# ** **

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND**

**CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and in connection with theaccompanying report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,2005 that is being filed concurrently with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officersof Clayton Williams Energy, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that:

 

1.               TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| * * | */s/ Clayton W. Williams* |
|----------|---------------------------|
|     | Clayton W. Williams       |
|     | Chief Executive Officer   |
|     | November 8, 2005     |
|     |                      |
|     |                      |
| * * | */s/ Mel G. Riggs*        |
|     | Mel G. Riggs              |
|     | Chief Financial Officer   |
|     | November 8, 2005     |

 

----
# C_2009069EN.01003305.xml

| 21.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/33

---

Order of the President of the Court of 26 November 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic

(Case C-220/08) (1)

1

(2009/C 69/77)

Language of the case: Greek

Language of the case: Greek

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 183, 19.7.2008.

1

---
Independent Auditors' Consent
                          -----------------------------

The  Board  of  Directors
Summit  Financial  Corporation

We  consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form
S-8  (No.  33-83538,  33-94962, and 33-94964) of Summit Financial Corporation of
our  report  dated January 18, 2000, relating to the consolidated balance sheets
of  Summit Financial Corporation and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December
31,  1999  and  1998,  and  the  related  consolidated  statements  of  income,
shareholders'  equity  and  comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the
years  in the three-year period ended December 31, 1999, which report appears in
the  December  31,  1999  Annual  Report  on  Form  10-K  of  the  Company.


      /s/ KPMG LLP

Greenville,  South  Carolina
March  22,  2000
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7006** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM ODEN , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Martinsburg
. Gina M. Groh , Chief District Judge. ( 3:11

- cr - 00056

- GMG

- RWT

- 1 )

Submitted : October 1 5 , 201 5 Decided: October 20, 2015

Before WILKINSON, AGEE , and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Christopher William Oden , Appellant Pro Se. Shawn Angus Morgan , Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia; Erin K. Reisenweber , Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia; Stephen Donald Warner , A ssistant United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Christopher William Oden appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion s for a sentence reduction and for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Oden , No. 3:11

- cr 00056

- GMG

- RWT

- 1 (N.D.W. Va., Mar. 30, 2015; May 26, 2015). We de ny Oden’s motion for resentencing. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Comment Info: =================

General Comment:Petition for Exemption/ Rulemaking
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 244 (Thursday, December 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 88425]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28048]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 21, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 11, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 33 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2024-109, CP2024-114.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-28048 Filed 12-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P