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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JACK LOUMENA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

 v.

LESLIE NICHOLS; WALTER P.

HAMMON,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-15250

D.C. No. 5:15-cv-01372-BLF

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Beth Labson Freeman, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 16, 2016** 

Before: LEAVY, BERZON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Jack Loumena appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional violations arising from his

parents’ state court divorce proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

FILED

NOV 23 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* 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). Accordingly, Loumena’s

request for oral argument, set forth in his reply brief, is denied.
§ 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. Noel

v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003). We affirm. 

The district court properly dismissed Loumena’s action because it is a

“forbidden de facto appeal” of a state court order denying Loumena’s request for

relief from restrictions on his ability to live with his mother and raises

constitutional claims that are inextricably intertwined with that state court order. 

See Noel v. Hall, 341 F.3d 1148, 1154 (9th Cir. 2003) (the Rooker-Feldman

doctrine bars de facto appeals of a state court decision and constitutional claims

“inextricably intertwined” with the state court decision). 

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Loumena’s motion

for recusal because Loumena failed to establish any ground for recusal. See United

States v. Johnson, 610 F.3d 1138, 1147 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting forth standard of

review and grounds for recusal). 

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

2 16-15250
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00394-CV

IN RE STEPHAN HWANG RELATOR

----------

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

TRIAL COURT NO. 15-02287-158

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of 

the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied. In addition, we vacate our October 21, 2016 order that 

stayed the contempt hearing in cause number 15-02287-158 pending in the 

158th District Court of Denton County, Texas.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GABRIEL, MEIER and SUDDERTH, JJ.

SUDDERTH, J., filed a dissenting opinion

DELIVERED: November 22, 2016

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                Entity                                                                      FEIN
                ------                                                                      ----
<S>                                                                                     <C>
              Famous Dave's of America, Inc.                                            41-1782300
              Famous Dave's Ribs, Inc.                                                  41-1884517
              Famous Dave's Ribs-U, Inc.                                                41-1884548
              Famous Dave's Ribs of Maryland, Inc.                                      41-1958496
              Famous Dave's of Kansas, Inc.                                             43-1903547
              D&D of Minnesota, Inc.                                                    41-1856702
              Lake & Hennepin BBQ and Blues, Inc.                                       41-1834594
              Minwood Partners, Inc.                                                    51-0396229
              Famous Dave's Ribs of Texas, Inc.                                         30-0070809
              Famous Dave's Ribs of Texas, LP                                           37-1428481
              FDA Properties, Inc.                                                      36-4379010
              Famous Dave's Properties of Texas, Inc.                                   61-1412539
              FDA Properties of Texas, LP                                               30-0070820
              Famous Dave's Club of Lewisville, Texas, Inc.                             71-0884059
              Famous Dave's Club of Mesquite, Texas, Inc.                               71-0884068
              FUMUME, LLC                                                               51-0409139
              FUMUME II, LLC                                                            41-2007036
              FUMUME III, LLC                                                           36-4459878
              Ribs of Rogers,Inc.                                                       45-0514825
</TABLE>
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2449 

To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to enhance penalties 

for theft of a firearm from a Federal firearms licensee. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 22, 2021 

Mr. GRAHAM (for himself, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. TILLIS, Mr. HAWLEY, Mr. CRUZ, 

Mr. CRAPO, Mr. RISCH, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. TUBERVILLE, 

Mr. CASSIDY, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. BRAUN, Mr. COTTON, Mr. 

GRASSLEY, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. 

DAINES, and Ms. MURKOWSKI) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to 

enhance penalties for theft of a firearm from a Federal 

firearms licensee. 

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 ‘‘Federal Firearms Li5 censee Protection Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO ENHANCE CERTAIN PENALTIES. 

7 Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is 

8 amended— 


SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2449 IS

1 (1) by striking subsection (i) and inserting the 

2 following: 

3 ‘‘(i)(1)(A) A person who knowingly violates section 

4 922(u), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this 

5 title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. 

6 ‘‘(B) In the case of a violation described in subpara7 graph (A) that occurs during the commission of— 

8 ‘‘(i) a burglary, the term of imprisonment shall 

9 be not less than 3 years; or 

10 ‘‘(ii) a robbery, the term of imprisonment shall 

11 be not less than 5 years. 

12 ‘‘(2) In this subsection— 

13 ‘‘(A) the term ‘burglary’ means the unlawful 

14 entry into, or remaining in, the business premises of 

15 a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or li16 censed dealer with the intent to commit a crime; and 

17 ‘‘(B) the term ‘robbery’ has the meaning given 

18 the term in section 1951(b).’’; and 

19 (2) in subsection (m), by inserting ‘‘or attempts 

20 to do so,’’ after ‘‘or licensed collector,’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK126QN23PROD with BILLS
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-15-0000420

23-NOV-2016

08:16 AM
# C_2014180EN.01000101.xml

| 13.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7269 — Kallisto/CABB International)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2014/C 180/01)

On 5 June 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7269. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32014M7269. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2015051EN.01000502.xml

| 13.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7297 — Dolby/Doremi/Highlands)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 51/04)

On 27 October 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7297. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7297. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1691

JOE JOHNSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Paul W. Grimm, District Judge. (8:15-

cv-00558-PWG)

Submitted: November 17, 2016 Decided: November 21, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joe Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Sandy David Baron, Meredith 

Campbell, Joy Catherine Einstein, SHULMAN, ROGERS, GANDAL, PORDY 

& ECKER, PA, Potomac, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Joe Johnson appeals the district court’s orders granting him 

leave to amend his complaint, granting Defendant’s motion to 

dismiss, and denying his motion for reconsideration. See Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm. Johnson v. Experian Info. Sols., 

Inc., No. 8:15-cv-00558-PWG (D. Md. Mar. 16, 2015; Nov. 17, 2015; 

filed May 17, 2016 & entered May 18, 2016). We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Office of Disciplinary Counsel *v.*Saumer.

[Cite as *Disciplinary Counsel v. Saumer*(1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 312.]

(No. 99-832

Submitted June 9, 1999

Decided August 25, 1999.)

*314
      *Jonathan E. Coughlan,*Disciplinary Counsel, and *John K. McManus,*Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.

*Per Curiam.*

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Generally, neglect of legal matters and a failure to cooperate in the ensuing investigation warrant an indefinite suspension. *Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Rollins*(1999), 84 Ohio St.3d 408, 410, 704 N.E.2d 1210, 1211. There are no circumstances that require a departure from the foregoing rule in this case. As the board concluded, respondent’s concealment of assets, neglect, and abandonment of the estate case compounded by his total lack of cooperation with and respect for the disciplinary process require an indefinite suspension. Respondent is hereby indefinitely suspended from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

*Judgment accordingly.*

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

866 

KA 13-01991 

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, LINDLEY, TROUTMAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V ORDER

JOHN E. SABINS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

(APPEAL NO. 1.) 

 

CARA A. WALDMAN, FAIRPORT, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

BROOKS T. BAKER, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BATH (JOHN C. TUNNEY OF COUNSEL),

FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Steuben County Court (Joseph W.

Latham, J.), rendered June 25, 2013. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a forged

instrument in the second degree. 

Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance

signed by defendant on August 29, 2016, and by the attorneys for the

parties on August 9 and 15, 2016,

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed 

upon stipulation.

Entered: November 10, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

      In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of DF China Technology,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the period ended March 31, 2004 (the
"Report"), I, Dr. Fan Di, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify
that to my knowledge:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. Section 78m or Section
78o(d)); 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, 2004

                                    By:     /s/ Dr. Fan Di
                                        ---------------------------------
                                    Name:  Dr. Fan Di
                                    Title: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
-... -;, .- - . , 

MEMO ROUTING SLIP 

4 

ORGANIZATION AND 

lllFORMATION 

NECESSARY 

ACTION 

NOTE AND RETURN 

SEE ME 

SIGNATURE 

' 
/ 

Office Memoran 

MPDIDE:D UQGt Kl cit S ~ 

TO c/s~ CQNtAli GgeE WBRB MAlfiHU DATB: 22 June l.953 

PROM P/P -4 

SUBJECT: Possible S~curity Leaks 

J.. For your inf"ormation and return, .. . .. , .. ·-· ~ ...... _ ..... 

2. Upon return, I Yill brief the Security Division on the C<Jofllf.J! aspect 

and request them to utilize their Liaison cbatmel. 'With the appropriate investigative Agency to ascertain the source of "leak" if any. 

TOP SECRET 

/l(Z_ ~­ ~~ / , USAF r/ c_J 

Acting Chief
# C_2015062EN.01000501.xml

| 20.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 62/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 62/5

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

19 February 2015

(2015/C 62/05)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1387 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 135,52 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4442 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,73790 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,5713 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0796 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,6450 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,373 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 305,34 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1695 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4461 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,7890 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4632 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4257 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,8331 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5148 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5466 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 267,63 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 13,2596 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,1229 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,7253 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 637,08 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,1309 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 50,291 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 70,7133 |
| THB | Thai baht | 37,064 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,2452 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,0207 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 70,8384 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1387

JPY

Japanese yen

135,52

DKK

Danish krone

7,4442

GBP

Pound sterling

0,73790

SEK

Swedish krona

9,5713

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0796

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,6450

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,373

HUF

Hungarian forint

305,34

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1695

RON

Romanian leu

4,4461

TRY

Turkish lira

2,7890

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4632

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4257

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,8331

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5148

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5466

KRW

South Korean won

1 267,63

ZAR

South African rand

13,2596

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,1229

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,7253

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 637,08

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,1309

PHP

Philippine peso

50,291

RUB

Russian rouble

70,7133

THB

Thai baht

37,064

BRL

Brazilian real

3,2452

MXN

Mexican peso

17,0207

INR

Indian rupee

70,8384

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
# C_2015003EN.01000201.xml

| 8.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 3/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 3/2

---

Special Report No 20/2014

‘Has ERDF support to SMEs in the area of e-commerce been effective?’

(2015/C 3/02)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 20/2014 ‘Has ERDF support to SMEs in the area of e-commerce been effective?’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: http://eca.europa.eu

A hard copy version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:

| European Court of Auditors |
| --- |
| Publications (PUB) |
| 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi |
| 1615 Luxembourg |
| LUXEMBOURG |
| Tel. +352 4398-1 |
| E-mail: eca-info@eca.europa.eu |

European Court of Auditors

Publications (PUB)

12, rue Alcide De Gasperi

1615 Luxembourg

LUXEMBOURG

Tel. +352 4398-1

E-mail: eca-info@eca.europa.eu

or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.

---
CERTIFICATION

      In   connection   with  the  Quarterly   Report   of   Barrington   Foods
International, Inc. (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March
31, 2002 as filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on  the date
hereof  (the "Report"), I, Rendal Williams, Chief Executive and Chief Financial
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 to the best
of my 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 the Company.

                                    /s/ Rendal Williams
Date:  August 19, 2002              ------------------------------------
                                    Rendal Williams
                                    Chief Executive and Financial Officer





                                         22
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2502 

To provide first-time, low-level, nonviolent simple possession offenders an 

opportunity to expunge that conviction after successful completion of 

court-imposed probation. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 28, 2021 

Mr. COONS (for himself, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. DURBIN, and Mr. TILLIS) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide first-time, low-level, nonviolent simple possession 

offenders an opportunity to expunge that conviction after 

successful completion of court-imposed probation. 

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 ‘‘Kenneth P. Thompson 

5 Begin Again Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2502 IS

1 SEC. 2. ELIMINATING AGE REQUIREMENT FOR 

2 EXPUNGEMENT OF CERTAIN CONVICTIONS 

3 FOR SIMPLE POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED 

4 SUBSTANCES BY NONVIOLENT OFFENDERS. 

5 Section 3607(c) of title 18, United States Code, is 

6 amended by striking ‘‘and the person was less than twen7 ty-one years old at the time of the offense,’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
# C_2014380EN.01000101.xml

| 27.10.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 380/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.10.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 380/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

2014/C 380/01

Last publication

Last publication

OJ C 372, 20.10.2014

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 361, 13.10.2014

OJ C 351, 6.10.2014

OJ C 339, 29.9.2014

OJ C 329, 22.9.2014

OJ C 315, 15.9.2014

OJ C 303, 8.9.2014

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---