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
JAVIER SOLOR IO-ALC AR

A Z, Pe t i tione r, v. JEFFER SON B . SESSIONS III, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R e sponde nt. No. 14-73800 Age n c y No. A097-267-752
M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for R e vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d Oc tobe r 12, 2017 * * Sa n Fra n c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : TASHIM A a

n d B YB EE, C irc uit Judge s , a nd LEITM AN, *** Distric t Judge
.



# FIL ED OCT 16 2017 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

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

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

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

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

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).

* * * The Honora

ble M a tthe w Fre de ric k

Le itm an , Unite d State s Distric t Judge for the Ea ste rn Distric t of M ic higa n, sitting by

de signa t ion.Javie r Solorio-Alc ara z , a na t ive and c i tiz e n of M e xic o, pe titions for re vie w of the B o ard of Im

m igration Appe a ls’ (“ B IA” ) de t e rm i na t ion tha t he suffe re d a
c onvic tion for im

m igration purpose s a

nd wa s ine ligible for c anc e lla tion of re m ova l unde r 8 U.S.C
. § 1229b(b). This c ourt ha s jurisdic t ion unde r 8 U.S.C
. § 1252 a nd
re vie ws que stions of la

w de novo. Re tuta v . Holde r , 591 F.3d 1181, 1184 (9th C ir. 2010). The Im

m igration Judgeand B IA c orre c tly de te rm ine d

tha t Solorio-Alc ara z ’ s ple a of no c onte st to posse ssion of a c ontrolle d substa

nc e for sa le unde r Ne va da R e vise d Statute s § 453.337 is a c onvic tion for im

m igration purpose s. A c rim ina l proc e e ding c onstitute s a

“ c onvic tion” whe re a djudic at ion of guilt ha s be e n withhe ld if “ t

he a lie n ha s e nte re d a

ple a of guilty or nolo c onte nde re ” and “ the judge ha s orde re d

som e form

of punishm e nt, pe na lty , or re stra int on thea lie n’ s libe rty to be im pose d.” 8 U.S.C . § 1101(a )(48)(A)(i)-(ii); se e also Re y e s v . Ly nc h , 834 F.3d 1104, 1108 (9th C ir. 2016) (holding tha t “ a sta te c onvic tion e xpunge d unde r state la

w is still a

c onvic tion for purpose s of e ligibility for c anc e lla tion of
re m ova l” an d tha

t “ the fe de ra l de finition of c onvic tion is sa tisfie d re ga

rdle ss of the
re ha bilita tive purpose of proba

tion, whe re the a lie n wa s punishe d or his libe rty wa s re stra i ne d by

the te rm s of his proba

tion” ). Solorio-Alc ara z e nte re d a ple a of nolo
c onte nde re and the c onditions im pose d by the Ne va da

Distric t C ourt we re 2re stra i nts on his libe rty . Ac c ordingly , he wa s c onvic te d of a c ontrolle d substa

nc e offe nse and is sta

tutorily ine ligible for c anc e lla tion of re m ova l. Se e 8 U.S.C
. § 1229b(b)(1)(C ). The pe tition for re vie w is DENIED.

3
#### Toohey, Appellee, *v.*Simmons et al., Appellants, et al. 

(No. 28316

Decided November 20, 1940.)

No appearance of record for appellees.

*Mr. George 8. Hawhe,*for appellants.

It is ordered and adjudged, *sua*sponte, that said appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason no debatable constitutional question is involved in said cause.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Day, Zimmerman, Williams, Matthias, Hart and Turner, JJ., concur.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
GILB ER TO C ASTR O, le a d pla intiff on be ha lf of him se lf a

nd a ll othe rs sim i la

rly situa te d, Pla i ntiff-Appe lla nt,
v. M ATTEL, INC .; e t a l.,

De fe nda nts-Appe lle e s. No. 18-56361 D.C . Nos. 2:17-c v-04732-VAP-KS 2:17-c v-04953-VAP-KS
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia Virginia A. Phillips, C hie f Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Argue d a nd Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 4, 2020 Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia B e fore : IKUTA a

nd C HR ISTEN, C irc uit Judge s , a n d M ARB LEY, ** Distric t Judge
. Gilbe rto C a stro a

ppe a l s the distric t

c ourt’ s dismissa l of his c om pla int
a lle ging viola

tions of Se c tion 10(b) a

nd Se c tion 20(a) of the Se c uritie s Exc ha nge 

# FIL ED FEB 20 2020 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, 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 Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The Honora

ble Alge non L. M arble y , Unite d State s C hie f Distric t Judge for the Southe rn Distric t of Ohio, sitting by de signa tion.Ac t of 1934. 15 U.S.C . §§ 78j(b), 78t(a ). W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C
. § 1291. The distric t c ourt did not err in holding tha t C a stro fa i le d to sa

t isfy the he ighte ne d ple a ding sta

nda rd unde r R

u le 9(b) of the Fe de ra l R

ule s of C ivil Proc e d ure and the Private Se c uritie s Litiga tion R e form

Ac t, 15 U.S.C . § 78u-4(b). Se e Zuc c o Partne rs, LLC v . Digimarc

C orp. , 552 F.3d 981, 990–91 (9th C ir. 2009). First, C a stro fa ile d to ple a d fa lsity a de quate ly . Although C a stro ple a de d a

“ lita ny of a lle ge d fa lse sta

te m e nts” by

de fe nda nts, he fa ile d

to ple a d “ spe c i fic fa c ts indic ating why those sta

te m e nts we re fa lse
. ” Me tzle r Inv . GMBH v . C orinthian C olls., Inc
. , 540 F.3d 1049, 1070 (9th C ir. 2008). Also, som e of the a lle ge d fa lse
or m isle a ding sta

te m e nts a re c orporate puffe ry , forward-looking sta te m e nts, or both, a nd thus a re not a c tiona

ble
. Se ePolic eRe t. Sy

s. of St. Louis v. Intuitive Surgic al, Inc
. , 759 F.3d 1051, 1060 (9th C ir. 2014); In re C ute ra Se c . Litig. , 610 F.3d 1103, 1111 (9th C ir. 2010). Se c ond, C a stro fa ile d to ple a d sc i e nte r a de quate l y . The c o m pla int did not inc l ude a l le gations tha

t sta nding a lone , or c onside re d in c o m bina tion, e sta b lishe d that any of the c o n fide ntia l witne sse s posse s se d the re q uisitepe rsona l knowle dge to ra ise an infe re nc e tha

t de fe nda nts ha d the ne c e ssa

ry sc ie nte r. Nor did Ste ve n

2Totz ke ’ s a

n e c dota l a

nd inform a l sta

t e m e nts ra ise suc h

an infe re nc e . Se e Zuc c o Partne rs , 552 F.3d a

t 995. AFFIRM E D.

3
EXHIBIT 24

                         POWER OF ATTORNEY
                         -----------------

Each of the following  directors and officers of Merrill Lynch & Co.,  Inc., the
general  partner of Merrill  Lynch  Preferred  Funding  I, L.P.,  Merrill  Lynch
Preferred Funding II, L.P.,  Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding III, L.P.,  Merrill
Lynch Preferred  Funding IV, L.P.,  Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding V, L.P., and
Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding VI, L.P. (the  "Partnerships"),  appoints Thomas
H.   Patrick,   John  C.   Stomber   and  Mark  B.   Goldfus   individually   as
attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution,  to sign and file
Annual  Reports on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended  December 29,  2000,  and
amendments to the forms, on behalf of each of the Partnerships,  with full power
and authority to perform any appropriate or necessary act in connection with the
filing of the forms.

This  Power  of  Attorney  has  been  signed  by the  following  persons  in the
capacities indicated on the 28th day of March, 2001.




            SIGNATURE                                  TITLE
            ---------                                  -----



    /s/ DAVID H. KOMANSKY                   Chairman of the Board and Chief
-----------------------------------------   Executive Officer
       (David H. Komansky)




    /s/ THOMAS H. PATRICK                   Executive Vice President and Chief
-----------------------------------------   Financial Officer (Principal
       (Thomas H. Patrick)                  Financial Officer)



    /s/ AHMASS L. FAKAHANY                  Senior Vice President and Controller
-----------------------------------------  (Principal Accounting Officer)
       (Ahmass L. Fakahany)


    /s/ W.H. CLARK                          Director
-----------------------------------------
       (W.H. Clark)


    /s/ JILL K. CONWAY                      Director
-----------------------------------------
       (Jill K. Conway)


    /s/ STEPHEN L. HAMMERMAN                Director
-----------------------------------------
       (Stephen L. Hammerman)


    /s/ GEORGE B. HARVEY                    Director
-----------------------------------------
       (George B. Harvey)


    /s/ WILLIAM R. HOOVER                   Director
-----------------------------------------
       (William R. Hoover)


    /s/ ROBERT P. LUCIANO                   Director
-----------------------------------------
       (Robert P. Luciano)


    /s/ DAVID K. NEWBIGGING                 Director
-----------------------------------------
       (David K. Newbigging)


    /s/ AULANA L. PETERS                    Director
-----------------------------------------
       (Aulana L. Peters)


    /s/ JOHN J. PHELAN, JR.                 Director
-----------------------------------------
       (John J. Phelan, Jr.)


    /s/ JOHN L. STEFFENS                    Director
-----------------------------------------
       (John L. Steffens)
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 Berthel Growth & Income Trust I (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Thomas J. Berthel, Chief Executive Officer of Berthel Fisher & Company Planning,
Inc., the Trust Advisor 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 Company's 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 Company.


November 9, 2006                    /s/  Thomas J. Berthel
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                         Thomas J. Berthel
                                         President and Chief Executive Officer
                                         Berthel Fisher & Company Planning, Inc.
                                         Trust Advisor
                                         Berthel Growth & Income Trust I
SERVED: AUGUST 1, 2012 

U.s'. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

GREAT LAKES AVIATION, LTD. . . . 

FAA DOCKET No. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS FAA-2012-0204 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

AND CANCELLING HEARING 

' ' 

7f.Jil 

.. . ·.I 

., 

On April 11, 2012, the Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter "Complainant") filed 

a Complaint. On April2, 2012, Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd. (hereinafter "Respondent") had 

requested a hearing. By letter dated July 12, 2012, Respondent filed a Withdrawal of :Request 

for Hearing, citing settlement of the matter. · ;..· 

14 C.P.R. § 13.215 ·states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an age~ci1tttomey 

may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a,. request for a hearing witqout the 

consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney withdraws th.e complaint or 

a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the answer, the aqministrative~law judge 

shall dismiss the proceedings under this subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the 'within filed Withdrawal of ReqtJ.est for Hearing having been read and 

considered, it is ORDERED that: ·'"" 
2 

1. Respondent's Withdrawal of Request for Hearing is hereby GRANTED; 

2. This pro·ceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice; and 

3. The hearing scheduled to be heard on November 28, 2012, is hereby CANCELLED: 

SO ORDERED. 

Attachments - Service List . 

~- L~fJ C.~#< Rtchard C. Goodwni 

Administrative Law Judge 

., 

'• 

. ... :") 
SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl0001 

ONE COPY 

Timothy R. Thornton, Respondent's Counsel 

Bt:iggs and Morgan, P .A. 

2200 IDS Center 

80 South 8th Street 

Minneapolis, MN 55402-2157 

.TEL: 612-977-8400 

FAJ(: 612-977-8650 

Kyle E .. Lomazow, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office ofthe Regional Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, W A 98057 

TEL: 425-227-1847 

FAJ(: 425-227-1007 

FDMS No. FAA-2012-0204 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

., 

The Honorable Richard Q. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 . 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Staff Assistant 

FAJ(: 202-366-7536 

1 

Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: 

Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S. W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 

2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

-2-
i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION No
. 04 -0 7- 00 80 2- CV HAGA NS, BURDINE, MONTGOM ERY, RUSTAY & WINCHESTER, P.C. , Appellant
v . Fa biola M AR TIN EZ , I ndividually and as Independe nt Administ ratrix of the Estate of

Gilbert Mar

tinez, Decea sed, and A rtemia Mar tinez, et al., Appellee s Fr om the 166th J udicial District Court, Be x ar County , Texas

Trial Court No. 2005-CI -06606 Honora ble Ba rbar a Ha nson Nellermoe , J udg e Presiding PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Alma L . L ópez, Chief J ustice

Sandee B ry an Mar ion, J ustice Rebec ca Simmons, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: J une 18, 2008 DI SMI SSED App ellan t ha s f

ile d a n u no pp os e d mo tio n to dis mis s th is a pp e a l. T he mot ion

c on ta ins a
cer tificate of service to appellee s, who have not oppose d the motion. Theref ore, w e g rant the motion
an d d i s m i s s the appe al. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42 .1 (a )( 1) . Co sts of the a pp e a l a re ta xed

a g a ins t
a pp e lla nt. PER CU RI AM
Order entered January 9, 2014

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 13

- 00578

- CR

MONIQUE DANAE MCCLIN TON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law

Rockwall County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CR11

- 1799



### O RDER

Before the Court is the State of Texas’s January 6, 2014 motion for an extension of time

to file its response to appellant’s brief. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS the State

to file its responsive brief with the Court n o later than 5:00 p.m., Monday, January 13, 2014.

/s/ ADA BROWN

PRESIDING JUSTICE
EXHIBIT 99.2


                             CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                            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 Viseon, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, John Harris, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of operations of the
Company.


Dated: November 18, 2002                            By      /s/ John Harris
                                                        -----------------------
                                                        Chief 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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [NAFTA—03325 and 03325AA]

      ( print page 65329)    
                    In accordance with Section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance on August 11, 1999, applicable to workers of Levi Strauss & Company, Wichita Falls Plant, Wichita Falls, Texas. The notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on September 29, 1999 (64 FR 52543). The certification document was amended several times to include numerous facilities located at various locations.                

At the request of the company, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of denim and Docker apparel. The company reports that worker separations occurred at the Walnut Creek Road Office of Levi Strauss located in Walnut Creek, California. The Walnut Creek Road Office is a satellite office of the subject firms' headquarters in San Francisco, California and directly supports Levi Strauss's many production facilities. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Levi Strauss and Company who were adversely affected by increased imports of denim and Docker apparel from Mexico.

The amended notice applicable to NAFTA—03325 is hereby issued as follows:

All workers of Levi Strauss & Company, Wichita Falls Plant, Wichita Falls, Texas (NAFTA-03325) and Walnut Creek Road Office, Walnut Creek, California (NAFTA-03325AA) who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after August 8, 1999 through August 11, 2001 are eligible to apply for NAFTA-TAA under Section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed in Washington, DC this 19th day of October, 2000.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. 00-28029  Filed 10-31-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
<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 on Form 10-QSB of Technology Visions
Group, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned James B. Lahey, Chief Executive Officer of Technology Visions Group,
Inc., and James A. Giansiracusa, Chief Financial Officer of Technology Visions
Group, Inc., 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 results of operations of the Company.

Dated: May 17, 2004

                                      /s/James B. Lahey
                                      -----------------
                                      James B. Lahey
                                      Chief Executive Officer

                                      /s/James A. Giansiracusa
                                      ------------------------
                                      James A. Giansiracusa,
                                      Chief Financial Officer
STATE OF CONNECTICUT

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

November 18, 2009

David Conroy

Unit Manager

Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Programs Branch

United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 1

1 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Mail Code: CAB

Boston, MA 02114-2023

Dear Mr. Conroy:

Enclosed for your review and approval is the State of Connecticut Department of Environmental

Protection’s (CTDEP’s) Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision. I am pleased to

demonstrate through this SIP revision the many steps Connecticut is taking to help restore natural

visibility conditions in our national parks and wilderness areas. This SIP revision identifies actions taken

to meet reasonable progress goals and explains Connecticut’s long-term strategy and commitment to

assist impacted Class I areas in meeting regional haze goals.

Connecticut is a member of the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU), and the

background for this SIP revision was developed in coordination with the other MANE-VU states.

Elements of the SIP revision include an identification of baseline and natural visibility conditions;

monitoring strategies for tracking reasonable progress; an alternative program for Best Available Retrofit

Technology; and a commitment to perform periodic evaluations towards meeting reasonable progress

goals. The SIP revision narrative includes elements responsive to the technical requirements of 40 CFR

51, Appendix V.

To satisfy the administrative, public participation requirements of 40 CFR 51, Appendix V,

Section 2.1, this submission includes the following documents:

 ̄ A copy of the notice of public hearing and comment, as published in four area newspapers;

 ̄ A certification of the public hearing; and

 ̄ A hearing report, including the comment received and CTDEP’s responses thereto, specifying

revisions made to the proposed SIP revision in response to comment.

In the interest of conserving resources and at the suggestion of your staff, we are enclosing a

single paper copy and one electronic copy of this SIP revision. If you have any questions or comments

regarding the submission, or if CTDEP may be of any assistance in your review, please contact Anne

Gobin, Chief, Bureau of Air Management at 860-424-3026.

Yours truly,

Amey W. Marrella

Commissioner

cc: Anne McWilliams, EPA Region 1 (cover letter only)

(Printed on Recycled Paper)

79 Elm Street  ̄ Hartford, CT 06106-5127

www.ct.gov/dep

An Equal Ol)porttmity Employer