alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARIA ELENA JIMENEZ-JIMENEZ, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 18-70919 

Agency No. A019-117-766 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 19, 2019**

Before: SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. 

Maria Elena Jimenez-Jimenez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for 

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

reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We 

review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. Mohammed v. 

Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

* 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

AUG 26 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-70919 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Jimenez-Jimenez’s motion 

to reopen as untimely, where she filed the motion more than twenty-four years 

after her final order of deportation, and she did not present sufficient evidence of 

due diligence for equitable tolling of the filing deadline. See 8 C.F.R. 

§ 1003.2(c)(2); Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 679 (9th Cir. 2011) (equitable 

tolling is available to a petitioner who is prevented from timely filing a motion to 

reopen due to deception, fraud, or error, as long as the petitioner exercises due 

diligence in discovering such circumstances).

Because the due diligence determination is dispositive, the BIA was not 

required to address prior counsels’ competence, and we do not address JimenezJimenez’s contentions regarding prejudice. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 

532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required to decide issues 

unnecessary to the results they reach).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Part 73 
          - [DA No. 00-2326; MM Docket No. 99-134; RM-9543 & RM-9572] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission. 

# ACTION:

Final rule; dismissal. 

# SUMMARY:

                        This document denies a                         *Petition for Reconsideration*                         of the                         *Report and Order*                         in MM Docket No. 99-134 which allotted Channel 268C to Drummond, Montana and Channel 250C3 to Victor, Montana.                         *See*65 FR 31101, May 16, 2000. Idaho Broadcasting Consortium (“Idaho”) filed a counterproposal requesting the substitution of Channel 294C1 for Channel 294C2 at McCall, Idaho and reallotment to Victor, Montana. The counterproposal was denied as Idaho was an applicant rather than a permittee or licensee at the time the counterproposal was filed and the counterproposal was not mutually exclusive with the proposal in this proceeding. The Commission's Rules sets forth limited provisions under which the Commission will reconsider a rule making action. The Petition for Reconsideration is denied as Idaho has failed to meet those requirements.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This is a summary of the Commission's Order in MM Docket No. 99-134, adopted October 4, 2000, and released October 13, 2000. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the Commission's Reference Center, 445 Twelfth Street, SW, Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractors, International Transcription Services, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036, (202) 857-3800, facsimile (202) 857-3805. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

John A. Karousos, 

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 00-27418 Filed 10-24-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
EXHIBIT
32.2








CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the amended Annual Report of Z Trim Holdings, Inc. on Form
10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Annual Report"), I, Brian Chaiken,
Chief Financial Officer of Z Trim Holdings, Inc. certify, pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatto my knowledge:





(1)           The
Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Z Trim Holdings,
Inc.




August
      19, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Brian
      ChaikenBrian
      ChaikenChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial Officer)
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. RP99-220-005]

Take notice that on October 11, 2000, Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited Partnership (Great Lakes) filed for disclosure, a transportation service agreement pursuant to Great Lakes' Rate Schedule FT entered into by Great Lakes and Midland Cogeneration Venture Limited Partnership (MCV) (FT Service Agreement). The FT Service Agreement being filed reflects a negotiated rate arrangement between Great Lakes and MCV commencing November 1, 2000.

Great Lakes states that the FT Service Agreement is being filed to implement a negotiated rate contract as required by both Great Lakes' negotiated rate tariff provisions and the Commission's Statement of Policy on Alternatives to Traditional Cost-of-Service Ratemaking for Natural Gas Pipelines and Regulation of Negotiated Transportation Services of Natural Gas Pipelines, issued January 31, 1996, at Docket Nos. RM95-6-000 and RM96-7-000.

Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-27095  Filed 10-20-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2841 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure that the Secretary of 

Defense affords each member of a reserve component of the Armed 

Forces with the opportunity for a physical examination before the member separates from the Armed Forces. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 25, 2013 

Mr. RAHALL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to ensure that the 

Secretary of Defense affords each member of a reserve 

component of the Armed Forces with the opportunity 

for a physical examination before the member separates 

from the Armed Forces. 

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 ‘‘Guard and Reserve 

5 Equal Access to Health Act’’. 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2841 IH

1 SEC. 2. PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS FOR MEMBERS OF A RE2 SERVE COMPONENT WHO ARE SEPARATING 

3 FROM THE ARMED FORCES. 

4 Section 1145 of title 10, United States Code, is 

5 amended by adding at the end the following new sub6 section: 

7 ‘‘(f) PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS FOR MEMBERS OF A

8 RESERVE COMPONENT.—(1) The Secretary concerned 

9 shall provide a physical examination pursuant to sub10 section (a)(5) to each member of a reserve component 

11 who— 

12 ‘‘(A) will not otherwise receive such an exam13 ination under such subsection; and 

14 ‘‘(B) elects to receive such a physical examina15 tion. 

16 ‘‘(2) The Secretary concerned shall— 

17 ‘‘(A) provide the physical examination under 

18 paragraph (1) to a member during the 90-day period 

19 before the date on which the member is scheduled to 

20 be separated from the armed forces; and 

21 ‘‘(B) issue orders to such a member to receive 

22 such physical examination. 

23 ‘‘(3) A member may not be entitled to health care 

24 benefits pursuant to subsection (a), (b), or (c) solely by 

25 reason of being provided a physical examination under 

26 paragraph (1). 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2841 IH

1 ‘‘(4) In providing to a member a physical examination 

2 under paragraph (1), the Secretary concerned shall pro3 vide to the member a record of the physical examination.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6378

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ROGER BUTLER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-94-68-4-2, CA-97-117-4-H) Submitted: May 29, 1998 Decided: August 25, 1998 Before NIEMEYER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roger Butler, Appellant Pro Se. Janice McKenzie Cole, United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate ofappealability and dismiss the appeal. We find that even if the district court’s entry of the amended judgment on September 16, 1996, triggered the one-year limitation period of § 2255 and the motion was therefore timely filed, Butler is still not entitled to any relief under § 2255. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
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



The undersigned, Kenneth A. Shewer, Chief Executive Officer of the Managing Owner, Preferred Investment Solutions Corp. (the Managing Owner), of World Monitor
Trust  Series B (the Fund), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Funds Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual
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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Fund.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Kenneth A. Shewer  
|Kenneth A. Shewer      
|Chief Executive Officer
|September 16, 2005
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-6275

HOWELL W. WOLTZ,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

JEREMY NASH, individually and in his official capacity; 

BRIGETTE SEAFUS, individually and in official capacity; JOEL 

ZIEBLER, individually and in his official capacity and 

unnamed defendants,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern 

District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Irene C. Berger, 

District Judge. (5:11-cv-00058)

Submitted: June 21, 2012 Decided: June 25, 2012

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Howell W. Woltz, Appellant Pro Se. J. Christopher Krivonyak, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for 

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Howell W. Woltz appeals the district court’s order 

dismissing his civil complaint, which was filed pursuant 

to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of 

Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), for failure to exhaust his 

available administrative remedies. We have reviewed the record 

and conclude the district court did not err in reaching this 

dispositive conclusion. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. See Woltz v. Nash, No. 5:11-cv00058 (S.D.W. Va. Feb. 1, 2012). 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
Throughput and Deficiency Agreement



 Exhibit 10.17 
  
 EXECUTION 
  
 This Agreement has been executed by the parties as of the date and year first above written. 
  

			
	 Sunoco Pipeline L.P.
  
 By: Sunoco Logistics Partners Operations
  

GP LLC, its general partner

		
	By:	 	 /s/ DEBORAH M. FRETZ




			
		
	Printed Name:	 	 Deborah M. Fretz




			
		
	Title:	 	 President and C.E.O.



  

			
	
	Valero Marketing and Supply Company
		
	By:	 	 /s/ ROBERT S. BEADLE

	 	 	 Robert S. Beadle,
 Senior Vice
President
Exhibit 32.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, James M. Papada, III, Chief Executive Officer of Technitrol, Inc., certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)   the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 26,
      2004 (the "Periodic Report") which this statement accompanies 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 78o(d)) and

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

Dated:  April 27, 2004


                                        /s/ James M. Papada, III
                                        --------------------------------
                                        James M. Papada, III

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Technitrol, Inc., and will be
retained by Technitrol, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

The foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q and shall not be considered as filed
as part of the Form 10-Q.
<PAGE>

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

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Advanta Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dennis
Alter, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

         (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 result of
                  operations of the Company.

/s/ Dennis Alter
--------------------------
Dennis Alter
Chief Executive Officer
August 13, 2003
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 25, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 63860]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27339]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 11730-000]


Black River Limited Partnership; Notice of Availability of Draft 
Environmental Assessment

October 19, 2000.
    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) 
regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 F.R. 47897), the Office 
of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for an original license 
for the existing and operating Alverno Hydroelectric Project, located 
on the Black River in the townships of Aloha, Benton, and Grant in 
Michigan (Cheboygan County) and has prepared an Environmental 
Assessment (EA) for the project.
    Copies of the EA are available for review in the Public Reference 
Branch, Room 2-A, of the Commission's offices at 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426. The EA may also be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.us/online/rims.htm. Please call (202) 208-2222 for assistance.
    Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this 
notice and should be addressed to David P. Boergers, Secretary, Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1-A, 
Washington, DC 20426. Please affix ``Alverno Hydroelectric Project No. 
11730-000'' to the top page of all comments. For further information, 
contact John Costello at (202) 219-2914 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#610b0e090f4f020e1215040d0d0e21070413024f0704054f1412"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c8a2a7a0a6e6aba7bbbcada4a4a788aeadbaabe6aeadace6bdbb">[email protected]</span></a>. 
Beginning November 1, 2000, comments and protests may be filed 
electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site 
at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-27339 Filed 10-24-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M


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

Marco Island 

Everglades 

FLORIDA'S" 

LAST PARADISE 

Convention & 

^'isitois Bureau 

?600 N. Horseshoe Drive 

Naples, FLS-l 104 

Phone-239-252-?384 

Fax: 239-252-2104 

www.ParadiseCodst.coin 

Augiisl 26,2010 

DEPARTMENT OF 

i-RAiNlSPORTATlON 

,uCKET OPERATIONS 

m OCT 13 A tO: 3 1 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

U.S. Secretary' olTransportaiion 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Dear Seeretar>' LaHood: 

On behalf of the Naples, N4arco Island, Everglades Convention & Visitors Bureau 

(CVB). please know that our organization is solidly in support of the Small 

Community Air Serviee Development Program funding request from the City of 

Naples Airpoi l Authority. They arc requesting assistance to purchase a Common 

Use Passenger Processing System and marketing and promotion funding. 

Since 2005. Naples, FL like many small communities throughout the nation, has 

seeti a reduction or elimination o f commercial air service. However. Naples is, 

unique to many o f these communities in possessing the population and 

intrastnicture to make commercial air ser\'iee a success. 

As the official destination marketing organization for Collier County, we arc very 

interested in supporting new air service for the Naples Airport. We are committed 

to assisting the Naples Airport Authority in promoting any new service on our 

web.siie. our annual visitor guide and through our world-wide Public Relations 

efforts. We anticipate that we could eoinmit up to $100,000 through in-kind and 

cash contributions to promote new air ser\'ice in the coming year. 

We hope you wil l seriously consider the application frotii the Naples Airport 

Authority for 5280,000 in air scr\'ice development assistance. 

Sincerely. 

Jack W. Wen , 

Executive Director