alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT R OB ER T J. ELLIS, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. FAULK; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 14-15426 D.C . No. 2:13-c v-02197-C KD M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of C a lifornia C aroly n K. De la ne y , M a gistra

te Judge , Pre siding ** Subm itte d April 22, 2015 *** B e fore : GOODW IN, B YB EE, a nd C HR ISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. R obe rt J. Ellis, a

C a lifornia

sta te prisone r, a

ppe a l s pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismi ssing his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c t ion a lle g ing tha t sta te 

# FIL ED MAY04 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.

** Ellis c onse nte d to proc e e d be fore a m a gistra te judge . S

e e 28 U.S.C . § 636(c ).

*** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).offic ia ls im

prope rly ba nne d, c onfisc ate d, a

nd de stroy e d his pe rsona l prope rty . W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo. N ordstrom v . Ry an , 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th C ir. 2014) (dismissa l unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1915A). W e a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dism isse d Ellis’ s proc e dura l due proc e ss c la im s be c a use Ellis fa ile d

to a lle ge fa c ts suffic ie nt to show tha t he wa s de p rive d of a libe rty inte re st c ogniz a

b le unde r the Due Proc e s s C la use . Se e Sandin v . C

onne r , 515 U.S. 472, 484 (1995) (sta te s c an c re at e libe rty inte re sts prote c t e d by the Due Proc e s s C la

use whe re prison offic ia ls “ im pose [] aty pic a l a nd signific ant ha

rdship on the inm ate in re lation to ordina ry inc i de nts of prison life . ” ). M ore ove r, Ellis ha d a n a de quate post-de p rivation re m e dy unde r C a lifornia

la w. Se e Barne t t v . C e ntoni , 31 F.3d 813, 816-17 (9th C ir. 1994) (pe r c uriam ) (a ne glige nt or inte ntiona l de priva

tion of a prisone r’ s prope rty

fa ils to sta

te a c la im if the sta te ha s an a d e q uate post-depriva

tion re m e dy , whic h

C a lifornia

provide s). W e do not c onside r m atte rs not spe c ific a lly an d distinc tly

ra i se d a nd a rgue d in the ope ning brie f, or a

rgum e nts a

n d a lle g ations ra ise d for the first tim e on a ppe a l or in the re ply brie f. Se e Padge tt v . W right , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th C ir. 2009) (pe r c uriam ).

1 4 - 1 5 4 2 6 2Ellis’ s “ M otion Notic e of Subm ission of Exhibits a n d Furthe r State m e nts,” re c e ive d De c e m

b e r 19, 2014, is in e ffe c t

an a dde ndum

to Ellis’ s inform a l ope ning brie f. The C le rk is dire c te d to filethe m otion. AFFIRM E D.

1 4 - 1 5 4 2 6 3
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 41 (Thursday, February 29, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 14902]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-04276]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

[OMB Number 1121-0100]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection 
eComments Requested; Reinstatement of a Previously Approved Collection 
Census of Jails 2024-26; Correction

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice published a document in the Federal 
Register of February 26, 2024, concerning request for comments on an 
information collection. The document contained incorrect dates.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zhen Zheng, (202) 598-9955.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of February 26, 2024, in FR Doc. 2024-
03768, on page 1, in the third paragraph column, correct the Dates 
caption to read:

DATES: Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 30 days until 
March 27, 2024.

    Dated: February 26, 2024.
Darwin T. Arceo,
DOJ Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024-04276 Filed 2-28-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-CW-P
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection
with this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Ridgewood Energy O Fund, LLC (the
Fund) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of
the undersigned officers of the Fund hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
(section) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (section) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to the best of their knowledge:

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

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

|       |                |     |        |                                                     
|------ | -------------- | --- | ------ | ----------------------------------------------------
|Dated: | March 12, 2009 |     |        | RIDGEWOOD ENERGY O FUND, LLC                        
|       |                |     |        |                                                     
|       |                | By: | /s/    | ROBERT E. SWANSON                                   
|       |                |     |        |                                                     
|       |                |     | Name:  | Robert E. Swanson                                   
|       |                |     | Title: | President and Chief Executive Officer               
|       |                |     |        | (Principal Executive Officer)                       
|       |                |     |        |                                                     
|Dated: | March 12, 2009 |     |        |                                                     
|       |                | By: | /s/    | KATHLEEN P. McSHERRY                                
|       |                |     |        |                                                     
|       |                |     | Name:  | Kathleen P. McSherry                                
|       |                |     | Title: | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|       |                |     |        | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)        

A signed
original of this written statement or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to
Ridgewood Energy O Fund, LLC and will be retained by Ridgewood Energy O Fund,
LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request. The foregoing certification is
being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being
filed as part of this report or as a separate disclosure document.

---
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, 0 C. 20460 

Mr. Stuart Solomon, President 

Pub! ic Service Company of Oklahoma 

2 I 2 East 61

h Street 

Tulsa, OK 74119 

JUL 1 8 2012 

Mr. Steve Thompson, Executive Director 

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 

P.O. Box 1677 . 

Oklahoma City, OK 73101-1 677 

Dear Mr. Solomon and Mr. Thompson: 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

I want to express my thanks to both of you and the others who participated in the discussion on 

Thursday, July 12,2012 regarding the remaining issues in Public Service Company of Oklahoma's 

(PSO) forward-looking and comprehensive approach to achieving emission reductions in Oklahoma. I 

know I speak not only for the EPA Office of Air and Radiation, but also for Sam Coleman and his team 

in EPA Region 6, in expressing my appreciation for all the hard work and commitment it has taken you 

to reach this accord. 

EPA is pleased with the final agreement made by the State of Oklahoma and PSO to develop its 

plan for reducing emissions to meet state and federal requirements at the two coal-fired generating units 

at its Northeastern Station in Oologah, Oklahoma. While this agreement is focused on complying with 

the visibility requirements of the Clean Air Act, the control technology described in the agreement is 

also intended to achieve compliance with the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard (MATS). EPA supports 

such a comprehensive approach. Furthermore the types of controls that PSO plans to install (a 

combination of Dry Sorbent Injection (DSI) and subbituminous coal to meet the acid gas limits, 

activated carbon injection and a baghouse to meet the mercury limits, and a baghouse to meet the PM 

limits) are the types of controls that, when well designed and operated, EPA would expect to be able to 

meet the MATS limits. 

EPA has every confidence that this technology, when properly installed and operated, will 

provide a means for PSO to meet both the visibility requirements of the Clean Air Act and the MATS 

requirements. This is exactly the type of agreement that will provide for a cost-effective approach to 

meet both the visibility requirements ofthe Clean Air Act and ultimately the MATS rule. EPA is 

committed to work closely with ODEQ in the development of the proposed SIP revision for a revised 

BART determination for the PSO plant based on the plan outlined in this agreement. 

Internet Address (URL) · http llwww epa gov 

Recycled/Recyc lable • Pnnted w1th Vegetable 011 Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer Process Chlonne Free Recycled Paper 
I look forward to the continued success of our organizations in the implementation of this 

important agreement. 

Sincerely yours, 

na McCarthy 

Assistant Administrator
Chico Enterprise-Record 

400 E. Park Ave. 

Chico, Ca 95928 

530-896-7702 

erlegal@chicoer.com 

BUTIE COUNTY AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 

ATIN: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE,629 ENTLER AVENUE,STE 

15 

CHICO CA 95928 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE 

OF CALIFORNIA, 

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF BUTTE 

In The Matter Of 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC WORKSHOP AND HEARING. 

AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA } 

ss. 

COUNTY OF BUTTE 

The undersigned resident of the county of Butte, State of 

California, says: 

That I am, and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of 

the United States and not a party to nor interested in the 

above entitled matter; that I am the principal clerk of the 

printer and publisher of 

The Chico Enterprise-Record 

The Oroville Mercury-Register 

That said newspaper is one of general circulation as defined 

by Section 6000 Government Code of the State of California, 

Case No. 26796 by the Superior Court of the State of 

California, in and for the County of Butte; that said 

newspaper at all times herein mentioned was printed and 

published daily in the City of Chico and County of Butte; that 

the notice of which the annexed is a true printed copy, was 

published in said newspaper on the following days: 

Dated June 05, 2014 

at Chico, California 

3/25/2014 

~cstVA<A_ T F 

(Signature) 

Legal No. 0005132656 

NOnCE OF PUBLIC WORKSHOP AND HEARING 

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Butte County Air Quality Management Dis· 

trict (District} Governing Board will hold a public workshop and hearing to 

consider adoption of proposed amendments to Rule 100·Definitions, Rule 

400-Pennit Requirements, Rule 401-Permit Exemptions, Rule 432-Federal New 

Source Review and Rule 433·Rice Straw Emission Reduction Credits. The pro· posed amendments to the rules streamline the rules to improve consisten· 

cy, remove unneeded references, and include missing elements necessary to fulfill the minimum permitting program requirements for submittal into 

the District's State Implementation Plan. The proposed amendments do not 

change the current implementation of the permit program. The time, date, and location of the public workshop and hearing are given below: 

Public Workshop: 2:00 p.m. April 3, 2014, District office. (address below) Public Hearing: 10:00 a.m. April 24, 2014, City of oroville council Chambers. 

1735 Montgomery Street, Oroville. CA 95965 

The Staff Report and proposed amended rules may be reviewed at the Dis· 

trict office at the address below or on the District website: www.bcaqmd.or 

g. For additional information please contact David Lusk at (530) 332·9400, exl 107. Written comments on the proposed rules must be submitted by April 17, 2014 to: Board Clerk, Butte County Air Quality Management District. 

629 Entler Avenue, Suite 15, Chico, CA 95928. 

[2013-157.1) DATED: March 25,2014 

BY: w. James Wagoner Air Pollution Control Officer 

Publish: 3/25/14
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>      1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997 
<CASH>                                          19,166 
<SECURITIES>                                         0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,862 
<ALLOWANCES>                                       525 
<INVENTORY>                                      9,249 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                44,655
<PP&E>                                          25,473
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,720
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  56,408
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,921 
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0 
<COMMON>                                        20,302 
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,185 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    56,408 
<SALES>                                         48,935 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                48,935 
<CGS>                                           26,073
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   37,605
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    34
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,823
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,103
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,720
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0 
<CHANGES>                                            0 
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,720 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .70 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .70 
        

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          10,537
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   35,835
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,000
<INVENTORY>                                      6,525
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                49,897
<PP&E>                                          36,929
<DEPRECIATION>                                  35,830
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,996
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,658
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        27,046
<OTHER-SE>                                    (27,708)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,996
<SALES>                                        175,783
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               175,783
<CGS>                                           99,805
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   99,805
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                92,147
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 3,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (16,169)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (16,169)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (16,169)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        

</TABLE>
#### ROSENBERG v. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF LOUISVILLE AND JEFFERSON COUNTY, et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

July 19, 1954.

H. A. I. Rosenberg, pro se.

Thomas S. Dawson, Louisville, for appellees.

CAMMACK, Justice.

H. A. I. Rosenberg, a candidate seeking the Republican Party’s nomination for United States Representative in the Third Congressional District, brought suit in the Jefferson Circuit Court to restrain the local *172Republican party organization from endorsing and v actively supporting John M. Robsion in th^ coming August primary election. X

He alleged in gen^^al_..terms that-Hhe appellees were engaged in a common conspiracy to use the local organization’s money, influence, machinery and personnel to bring about the nomination of Mr. Robsion in the primary election. He stated that he, being a candidate for the same nomination, would suffer great and irreparable injury unless the appellees were restrained from so doing. The appellee’s motion to dismiss the complaint was sustained on the ground that'the court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the action. The appellant then attempted to file an amended complaint, but the court sustained the appellee’s objection to that also.

Tire only question before us on this appeal is whether the complaint stated a claim which a court of equity will entertain.

The appellant relies upon section 6 of the Kentucky Constitution, KRS 119.020, and the Constitution and By-Laws of the Jefferson County Republican Executive Committee.

Section 6 of our Constitution provides that, “All elections shall be free and equal.” That section has been construed by this Court as applying only to general elections. Davis v. Stahl, 287 Ky. 629, 154 S.W.2d 736; Montgomery v. Chelf, 118 Ky. 766, 82 S.W. 388. Clearly it has no application to this case.

KRS 119.020 provides in part:

> “ * * * every political party shall nominate all of its candidates for elective offices to be voted for at any regular election at a primary election held as provided in this chapter, and the governing authority of any political party shall have no power to nominate any candidate for any elective office or to provide any method of nominating candidates for any elective office other than by primary elections as provided in this chapter.”

This statute sets forth the method by which a political party may nominate its candidates. Clearly the statute does not prevent a party organization from taking part in a primary election. Whether' the Constitution and By-Laws of the Jefferson County Republican Executive Committee prohibit such action does not concern us. Courts do not interfere with internal party matters. Smith v. Howard, 275 Ky. 165, 120 S.W.2d 1040; Davis v. Hambrick, 109 Ky. 276, 58 S.W. 779, 51 L.R.A. 671.

The appellant has failed to allege an injury from which a court of equity will protect him by injunction.

Judgment affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-1747

ELKAY MINING COMPANY, a West Virginia Corporation, Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus
ATEL FINANCIAL CORPORATION, a foreign corporation; ATEL CASH DISTRIBUTION FUND V, L.P., a limited partnership, Defendants - Appellants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (CA-99-1144-2)
Submitted: June 3, 2003 Decided: June 18, 2003
Before WILKINS, Chief Judge, and LUTTIG and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Marvin Wiseblood, BERG & PARKER L.L.P., San Francisco, California, for Appellants. Richard J. Bolen, HUDDLESTON, BOLEN, BEATTY, PORTER & COPEN, L.L.P., Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellee.2 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant ATEL Financial Corporation (“ATEL”) appeals the district court’s resolution of cross-motions for summary judgment in favor of Appellee Elkay Mining Company (“Elkay”) on Elkay’s declaratory judgment claim that it did not owe any “termination value” to ATEL on an expired lease for mining equipment. We have reviewed the record below, the opinion of the district court, and the briefs of the parties. Because we conclude that the district court properly resolved the legal questions presented on summary judgment, we affirm the judgment of that court on the reasoning of its well-written opinion.

AFFIRMED