alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JESUS MATIAS

- JESUS,

Petitioner,

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 15

- 71633 Agency No. A200

- 567

- 155

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 2 , 2020 * *
Before: WALLACE, CLIFTON, and BRESS , Circuit Judges

. Jesus Matias

- Jesus, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigrat ion Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge ’ s decision denying his application for asylum , withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We revi ew factual findings for substantial

* 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

DEC 7 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

evidence

. Zehatye v. Gonzales , 453 F.3d 1182, 1184

- 85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the determination that Matias

- Jesus failed to
establish a well

- founded fear of perse cution. See Gu v. Gonzales , 454 F.3d 1014, 1022 (9th Cir. 2006) (petitioner failed “to present compelling, objective evidence demonstrating a well

- founded fear of persecution”) ; see also Nagoulko v. INS , 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (possibility of future persecution “too speculative ”)

. Thus, Matias

- Jesus’s asylum claim fails. In this case, because Matias

- Jesus failed to establish eligibility for asylum, he failed to establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Zehatye , 453 F.3d
at 1190.
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA ’ s denial of CAT relief because
Matias

- J esus failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Guatemala

. See Aden
v. Holder , 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
As stated in the court’s August 21 , 2015 order, the temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED
.
Page | 1

BALTIMORE COUNTY, MARYLAND

City Code City

240026005 ARBUTUS

240047005 BALDWIN

240050510 BALTIMORE

240053005 BALTIMORE HIGHLANDS

240106005 BENTLEY SPRINGS

240165005 BORING

240174005 BRADSHAW

240202005 BROOKLANDVILLE

240224005 BUTLER

240255005 CATONSVILLE

240283005 CHASE

240314005 CHESTNUT RIDGE

240366005 COCKEYSVILLE

240412005 CURTIS BAY

240455005 DUNDALK

240498005 EDGEMERE

240543005 ESSEX

240572005 FORT HOWARD

240573005 FORK

240578005 FOWBLESBURG

240581005 FREELAND

240582510 FORT HOLABIRD

240652005 GARRISON

240671005 GLEN ARM

240674005 GLENCOE

240688005 GLYNDON

240698005 GRANITE

240735005 HALETHORPE

240767005 HAREWOOD PARK

240778005 HEBBVILLE

240792005 HEREFORD

240829005 HYDES

240838005 JACKSONVILLE

240864005 KINGS COUNTY

240865005 KINGSVILLE

240887005 LANSDOWNE

240951005 LONG GREEN

240963005 LYNNE ACRES

240967005 LUTHERVILLE TIMONIUM

240989005 MARYLAND LINE

241000005 MIDDLETOWN

241005005 MIDDLE RIVER

241023005 MONKTON
Page | 2 

City Code City

241139005 NOTTINGHAM

241164005 OLIVER BEACH

241171005 OVERLEA

241174005 OWINGS MILLS

241182005 PARKTON

241189005 PARKVILLE

241194005 PERRY HALL

241202005 PHOENIX

241203005 PIKESVILLE

241296005 RANDALLSTOWN

241300005 REISTERSTOWN

241362005 ROSEDALE

241494005 SPRINGDALE

241495005 SPARKS

241500005 SPARROWS POINT

241507005 STEVENSON

241528005 SWEET AIR

241585005 TOWSON

241597005 TWIN RIVER BEACH

241615005 UPPERCO

241618005 UPPER FALLS

241676005 WHITE MARSH

241677005 WHITE HALL

241683005 WINDSOR MILL

241698005 WOODLAWN

241699005 WOODMOOR

241701005 WOODSTOCK COLLEGE
Dear Mr

. Schwarz :

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing fro m your petition (Docket No. FAA−2015

− 4528 )

. This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Describe the aircraft make (s) , model (s) , and type(s)(i.e. , fixed

- wing, rotorcraft, lighter

- than

- air) for the proposed UAS operation. The description (s) should include the maximum weight ( including payload)

. This information can be located in the aircraft manual(s).
Please submit the additional information (non

- proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov

. Once your information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the requested information (and any proprietary information ), as well as your comment tracking number from regulations.gov via e

- mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov

. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 12/29/15 . I f we do not receive the information , we will close the dock et without notifying you further. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267

– 4549

. Sincerely, /S/ Michael Cameron Program Analyst
p.nr:n; . Tr'-- . • . . ; 1 ' • • " 1 I • I ' I L - '\ : 3 

# OCALAED C MARIO N COUNT Y grcfl l lo rbusiness , grea t fo rlife . Augus t 25 . 201 0 Aloh a Le y Associat e Directo r Smal l Communit

yAi rServic e Developmen t Progra m (SCASDP ) aloha.lev@dot.ao v Re : Smal l Communit yAi rSen/Ic e Developmen t Gran t Dea rMs . Ley , Th e Ocala/Mario n CountyEconomi cDevelopmen t Corporatio n full ysupport s Gainesvill e Regiona l Airport' s reques t fo ra Smal l CommunityAi rServic e Developmen t gran t t o hel p suppor

t America n Eagl e Airline s flight s t o Miam i an d th e existin g loca l ai r carriers , Delta Ai rLine s an d U S Airways . W e recogniz e th e Importanc e o f ai rservic e t o economi cdevelopmen t an d th e qualityo f lif e fo rresident s an d visitors I n ou rregion . Th e newAmerica n Airline s servic e wil l provid e th e much-needed , convenien t acces s t o Sout h Florida . Additionally , American' s extensiv e domesti can d Internationa l rout e structur e fro m Miam i wil l provid e newtrave l option s an d a greate rleve l o f frequency . Du e t o th e critica l importanc e o f qualityai rservic e t o economi cvitality , w e ar e committe d t o supportin g American' s new servic e an d partnerin g wit h Gainesvill e Regiona l Airpor

t t o continu e t o assis t wit h ai rservic e improvements . I urg e yo u t o procee d wit h approvin g th e Airport Authority' s request fo ra gran t t o hel p wit h marketin g effort s fo rth e nex t tw o years . I f yo u hav e an yquestion s abou t Ocal a o r th e EDC , pleas e fee l fre e to^ontac t m e

'ete rJ . Tes c President/C^O

Ocala/Mario n Count y EconcHnI cDevelopmen t Corporatio n 7 ^ Enl$fp(iS 6 Center , Suit e 10 5 300 3 S.W . Coleg e Road , Ocala , F L M47 4 352-M1-441 0 • 352-291-441 4 FA X wvw.ocaiaedcof g Pag e 5 8
### You are now leaving OPM.Gov

You are now leaving OPM.Gov and entering a site hosted by a different Federal agency or company.

You will automatically be forwarded to the target page within five seconds.  If you are not automatically forwarded please proceed to https://www.usalearning.gov/
Exhibit 10.22


 


 






    	 



    	 



    

 


 






    	2



    	 



    

 


 


 


  



    	3



    	 



    

 









    	4



    	 



    

 


 


 



    	5



    	 



    

 





 






    	6



    	 



    

 









    	7



    	 



    

 


8
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 

ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC. 

First Amendment to the 

2013 Stock Option Plan 

This First Amendment (this “First Amendment”) to the 2013 Stock Option Plan (as amended from time to time, the
“Plan”) is made and entered into effective as of August 12, 2014 by Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”). 

WHEREAS, Section 6(j) of the Plan provides for the grant of reload options in the event that an optionee exercises an option and
pays some or all of the exercise price with shares of common stock of the Company; and 
 WHEREAS, Section 10 of the Plan
provides that the Board of Directors may, with respect to any shares of common stock of the Company not subject to options at such time, suspend, discontinue, revise or amend the Plan in any respect for any purpose which it may deem advisable,
subject to certain limited exceptions; 
 NOW, THEREFORE, effective as of the date hereof, the Plan is hereby amended as
follows: 
 1. Section 6(h) of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
“(h) Conditions. The Option Agreement shall provide that exercise of the Option (in whole or in part) and the issuance of Shares pursuant thereto shall be contingent upon such conditions as the Board shall in its discretion specify,
subject to the limitations contained in §3(e).”. 
 2. Section 6(j) of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety. 

Except as set forth in this First Amendment, all of the terms and conditions of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this First Amendment effective as of the date hereof. 

 

			
	ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, INC.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Mark B. Sturgeon

		 	Mark B. Sturgeon,
		 	EVP, CFO, Secretary & Treasurer
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.                  

###### Surface Transportation Board

# AGENCY:

Surface Transportation Board.

# ACTION:

Notice; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Surface Transportation Board (Board) published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         on October 3, 2024, concerning the Board's intent to request from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval without change of the Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Chris Oehrle, PRA Officer, Surface Transportation Board, 395 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20423-0001, or                         *pra@stb.gov.*                         If you require an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act, please call (202) 245-0245.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of October 3, 2024, in FR Doc. 2024-22813, in 89 FR 80624. On page 80625, in the first column, in the                     **SUMMARY**                     heading, the first sentence correcting the following language “approval without change of the six existing collections described below” to read, “approval without change of the existing collection described below.” Due to this inadvertent error, comments on the original information collection will be accepted if submitted by November 18, 2024.                

Dated: October 11, 2024.

Jeffrey Herzig,

Clearance Clerk.

[FR Doc. 2024-23933 Filed 10-16-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
#### Johnson, Appellant, vs. City of Ripon and others, Respondents.

*March 8*

April *3, 1951.*

*86Fox' the appellant there were briefs by *Schmitt, Eckhardt & Gullickson*of Merrill, and oral argument by *L. F. Schmitt.*

*John L. Nesbitt,*city attorney, for the respondents.

• Broadfoot, J.

It has been determined in this state, in the case of *State ex rel. Wolf v. La Crosse L. H. Asso.*181 Wis. 33, 193 N. W. 994, that the directors of a private hospital corporation have the power to exclude physicians from the privilege of pi'acticing their profession in said hospital, and that the only right physicians have to practice therein is by contract. Our attention has not been directed to any Wisconsin case dealing with the right of a physician and surgeon to practice in a public hospital. The plaintiff has cited many cases from foreign jurisdictions and they have been carefully examined. The rule as laid down in those cases is well summarized in 26 Am. Jur., Hospitals and Asylums, p. 592, sec. 9:

> *“Regulations as to use or practice by physicians and surgeons.-*— It seems to be the practically unanimous opinion that private hospitals have the right to exclude licensed physicians from the use of the hospital, and that such exclusion rests within the sound discretion of the managing authorities. This is not, however, the rule applied to public hospitals, since a regularly licensed physician and surgeon has a right to practice in the public hospitals of the state so long as he stays within the law and conforms to all reasonable rules and regulations of the institutions. . .

It is therefore necessary to determine whether or not sec. 6 of art. V of the by-laws duly enacted for the government and maintenance of said hospital is a reasonable regulation. Neither this section nor any other section of said by-laws provides for any notice to the doctor of the nature of the charges against him nor for any notice of a date of hearing at which he may appear and defend himself as to the charges. No notice was given to the plaintiff herein *87prior to the adoption of the resolution suspending his right to practice his profession in said hospital. A regulation for the suspension of the right of a duly licensed physician and surgeon residing in the municipality owning, maintaining, and operating a public hospital is not reasonable unless provision is made for such notice and hearing. The trial held after the resolution of suspension is not a substitute for a hearing before the municipal hospital board. The resolution adopted on April 17, 1948, is therefore void and of no effect. The plaintiff being duly licensed and a resident of the city of Ripon is entitled to continue the practice of his profession in said hospital as he was prior to the adoption of said resolution.

*By the Court.*— Judgment reversed and cause remanded with the directions to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff as prayed for in his complaint.
Exhibit 32.1

MF Global Ltd.

Certification of the Chief
Executive Officer

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MF Global (together with its subsidiaries, the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Bernard W. Dan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.



|                       
|-----------------------
|Date: November 6, 2009 
|                       
|/s/ Bernard W. Dan     
|Bernard W. Dan         
|Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATIONS**I, Marc Kilbride, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CenterPoint Energy Transition BondCompany II, LLC;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.Date: May11, 2007                                                    /s/ Marc Kilbride   Marc Kilbride   Vice President and Treasurer (Principal FinancialOfficer)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JIMMY LEE DAVIS,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

KILOLO KIJAKAZI, Acting Commissioner

of Social Security; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 21

- 15338

D.C. No. 3:20

- cv

- 05805

- JD

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

James Donato, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 17, 2021 * *

Before: SILVERMAN, CHRISTEN, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

Jimmy Lee Davis appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various claims. We h ave

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)

. Barren v. Harrington , 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.

* 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 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 21

- 15338

1998) (order). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Davis’s action because Davis failed to

allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S.

662, 678 (2009) ( a plaintiff must allege facts that “allow[ ] the court to draw the

reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged”).

Davis’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. 3 ) is denied

as unnecessary because his in forma pauperis status continues in this court. All

other pending motions are den ied.

AFFIRMED.
### C OURT OF 

### A PPEALS

S E C O N D D I S T R I C T O F T E X A S

CHIEF JUSTICE

TERRIE LIVINGSTON

JUSTICES

LEE ANN DAUPHINOT

ANNE GARDNER

SUE WALKER

BILL MEIER

LEE GABRIEL

BONNIE SUDDERTH TIM CURRY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER

401 W. BELKNAP, SUITE 9000

F ORT WORTH, TEXAS 76196

- 0211

TEL: (817) 884

- 1900

FAX: (817) 884

- 1932

www.txcourts.gov/2ndcoa CLERK

DEBRA SPISAK

CHIEF STAFF ATTORNEY

LISA M. WEST

GENERAL COUNSEL

CLARISSA HODGES

March 27, 2015

Don Schnebly

Parker Coun ty District Attorney

117 Fort Worth St.

Weatherford, TX 76086

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL * Jack V. Strickland

The Bryce Building

909 Throckmorton St.

Fort Worth, TX 76102

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

RE: Court of Appeals Number: 02

- 15

- 00027

- CR, 02

- 15

- 00028

- CR,

0 2

- 15

- 00029

- CR

Trial Court Case Number: CR14

- 0051, CR14

- 0052,

CR14

- 0163

Style: William Bruce Senn, Jr.

v.

The State of Texas

The clerk’s record has been filed under the date of Thursday, March 26,

2015

, in the above referenced cause s

.

The appellant’ s brief is due Monday, April 27, 2015

. See Tex. R. App. P.

38.6. You will be notified when the case is set for submission.

A party desiring oral argument must note that request on the outside cover

of the party’s brief. See Tex. R. App. P

. 39.7

. If no oral argument is requested

by either party, the case may be submitted on the briefs

.

PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS COURT HAS ADOPTED THE

STANDARDS FOR APPELLATE CONDUCT, WHICH WERE ADOPTED AND

PROMULGATED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS AND THE TEXAS

CO URT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ON FEBRUARY 1, 1999 BY

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET ORDER NO. 99

- 9012. Copies of the standards

are available from this office and appear on the court's website at

www.txcourts.gov/2ndcoa

. Parties appearing before this court are expected02

- 15

- 00027

- CR

March 27, 2015

Page 2

t o adhere to these standards and non

- compliance will be addressed by the

court accordingly.

Respectfully yours,

DEBRA SPISAK, CLERK

By: Karen Brown, Deputy Clerk
|   | (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. |
|--------|-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   Date: |   | May      14, 2010                          |   | /s/      Frederick L. Hickman |
|-------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
|              |   | Frederick      L. Hickman                  |
|              |   | President      and Chief Executive Officer |

----