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NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In the Matter of: KENYON K. KELLEY,

 Debtor,

JAMES J. O’HAGAN,

 Appellant,

 v.

NORTHWEST FARM CREDIT

SERVICES, FLCA,

 Appellee.

No. 13-35324

D.C. No. 3:12-cv-05446-BHS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Benjamin H. Settle, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 18, 2014** 

Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

James J. O’Hagan appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

FILED

DEC 4 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
dismissing his appeal from orders of the bankruptcy court declaring him to be a

vexatious litigant and imposing sanctions. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

§ 158(d). We review for an abuse of discretion a district court’s dismissal for noncompliance with non-jurisdictional bankruptcy rules. Ehrenberg v. Cal. State

Univ. (In re Beachport Entm’t), 396 F.3d 1083, 1086-87 (9th Cir. 2005). We

affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing O’Hagan’s

appeal because, despite an order to show cause from the district court as to why it

should not dismiss for failure to perfect the appeal, O’Hagan failed to perfect the

record for over nine months after filing the appeal. See id. at 1087 (stating factors

to consider prior to dismissal of bankruptcy appeal for non-compliance with a

procedural rule).

To the extent that O’Hagan challenges the denial of his motion for

reconsideration, the district court did not abuse its discretion because O’Hagan

failed to establish a basis for reconsideration. See W.D. Wash. R. 7(h)(1) (setting

forth grounds for reconsideration); Hinton v. Pac. Enters., 5 F.3d 391, 395 (9th

Cir. 1993) (reviewing application of local rules for abuse of discretion); see also

Sch. Dist. No. 1J, Multnomah Cnty., Or., v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63

(9th Cir. 1993) (setting forth factors for reconsideration under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e)).

2 13-35324
We reject as unsupported by the record O’Hagan’s contention that the

district court judge failed to consider a motion to recuse himself.

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

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

(per curiam).

O’Hagan’s motion to consolidate, filed on August 22, 2013, is denied as

moot.

O’Hagan’s motion to stay further action, filed on September 6, 2013,

seeking to supplement the record, is denied.

AFFIRMED.

3 13-35324
##### 



Exhibit 31.02 Certification Under
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I, Robert G. Gargus, certify that:  1.
    I have reviewed this Annual report on Form 10-K of Silicon Image, Inc.;2.
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations 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 and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  (a)
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated 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 disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and(c)
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially 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 recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  (a)
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably 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 or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. Date: March 15, 2005 /s/ Robert G. Gargus
Robert G. Gargus
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
TO: 

FROM: 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, DC 20460 

RECEIPT OF DELIVERY 

DATE: 12/17/2015 

The Honorable Paul Ryan 

Speaker of the House of Representatives 

The Capitol, H-209 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW l 803A 

Washington, DC 20460 

Dear Mr. Speaker, 

TITLE(S) OF DOCUMENTS: 

I. 2-propenoic acid homopolymer. reaction products with poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), 

a-(tris(l-phenylethyl)phenyl)-w-hydroxy, tris(2-hydroxyethyl)amine salt); Tolerance Exemption [FRL # 

9939-71-0CSPP. OCSPP] Final Rule 

2. Air Plan Approval; SD: Update to Materials Incorporated by Reference [FRL # 9939-87-Region 8, 

Region 8] Final Rule 

3. Ammonium Acetate; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance [FRL # 9939-39-0CSPP. 

OCSPP] Final Rule 

4. Pesticides: Revisions to Minimum Risk Exemption [FRL # 9934-44-0CSPP, OCSPP] Final Rule 

5. Spinosad; Pesticide Tolerances [FRL # 9933-41-0CSPP, OCSPP] Fina l Rule 

RECEIVED sv:#i?>,_ '\u)IW':' Date: {hl.- / 1 I dD)5 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, DC 20460 

RECEIPT OF DELIVERY 

DATE: 12/17/2015 

TO: 

FROM: 

The Honorable Joseph Biden, Jr. 

President of the Senate 

The Capitol, S-212 

Washington, D.C. 205 10 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 1803A 

Washington, DC 20460 

Dear Mr. Vice President, 

TITLE(S) OF DOCUMENTS: 

I. 2-propenoic acid homopolymer, reaction products with poly(oxy-1,2-ethanediyl), 

a-(tris(l-phenylethyl)phenyl)-w-hydroxy. rris(2-hydroxyethyl)amine salt): Tolerance Exemption [FRL # 

9939-7 1-0CSPP, OCSPP] Final Rule 

2. Air Plan Approval; SD; Update to Materials Incorporated by Reference [FRL # 9939-87-Region 8, 

Region 8) Final Rule 

3. Ammonium Acetate; Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance [FRL # 9939-39-0CSPP, 

OCSPP) Final Rule 

4. Pesticides; Revisions to Minimum Risk Exemption [FRL # 9934-44-0CSPP, OCSPP] Final Rule 

5. Spinosad; Pesticide Tolerances [FRL # 9933-41-0CSPP, OCSPP] Final Rule 

I 

RECEIVED BY'G~~ Date: lui-1 l}tJ 
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, DC 20460 

RECEIPT OF DELIVERY 

DATE: 

Receipt of Delivery 

TO: 

FROM: 

General Counsel 

Government Accountability Office 

Room 7175 

441 G Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20548 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., W 1803A 

Washington, DC 20460 

TITLE(S) OF DOCUMENTS: 

12/ 17/2015 

I. 2-propenoic acid homopolymer, reaction products with poly(oxy-1.2-ethanecliyl), 

a-(tris(l-phenylcthyl)phenyl)-w-hyclroxy. tris(2-hydroxycthyl)aminc salt): Tolerance Exemption [FRL # 

9939-71-0CSPP. OCSPP] Final Rule 

2. Air Plan Approval; SD: Update to Materials Incorporated by Reference [FRL # 9939-87-Rcgion 8. 

Region 8] Final Rule 

3. Ammonium Acetate: Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance [FRL # 9939-39-0CSPP. 

OCSPP] Final Rule 

4. Pesticides: Revisions to Minimum Risk Exemption [r-RL # 9934-44-0CSPP. OCSPP] Final Rule 

5. Spinosad: Pesticide Tolerances [FRL # 9933-41 -0CSPP. OCSPP] Final Rule 

RECEIVED BY: - /;(; JLC- Date: tdr7 l)
# INAL 3Jn tbe Wniteb**~tates** 

# Qeourt ofjf 

# eberal QClaims No. 16-lOOC (Filed: March 9, 2016) (NOT TO BE REPORTED) 

### ********************************** FREDRICKWAYNE CONNORS, Plaintiff,


### v. UNITED STATES, Defendant. 

### ********************************** ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Fredrick Wayne Connors, Carson City, Nevada,

### prose. 

# FILED MAR - 92016 U.S. COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

James W. Poirier, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department ofJustice, Washington, D.C., for the defendant. With him onthe briefwere Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, and Robert E. Kirschman, Jr., Director, and Franklin E. White, Assistant Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department ofJustice, Washington, D.C. ORDER LETTOW, Judge
. PlaintiffFredrick Wayne Connors has filed an action without paying the court's filing fee, instead requesting a fee waiver under the 

### informapauperis statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Pursuant to Paragraph 1915(e)(2) ofthat statute, "the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that
... the action
. .. is frivolous or malicious." The government has filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack ofsubject matterjurisdiction. Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss, ECFNo. 5. Mr. Connors has filed at least ten complaints "against various communications and technology companies" between 2010 and 2015, all ofwhich were dismissed as frivolous or failing to state a claim. 

### See, e.g., Connors v. Charter Business, No
. 14-cv-688, 2015 WL 2194500, at *3 (D. Nev. May 11, 2015) (discussing plaintiffs filing history and dismissing complaint as frivolous for making fanciful allegations ofeavesdropping). In this instance, Mr. Connors alleges that an "Organization" implanted a "VERI CHIP" on his inner ear, applied "electricity and high decibel level frequency," and performed improper surveillance overMr. Connors. Compl. at 2-4
. Mr. Connors in effect claims he was "used as an object to develop newtechnology against [his] will." Compl. at 1 (capitalization omitted). 1 Mr. Connors' allegations are factually and legally frivolous within the meaning ofParagraph 1915(e)(2), and accordingly the action must be dismissed. CONCLUSION The defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and the complaint shall be dismissed on the ground that it is frivolous. 2 The clerk is directed to enterjudgmentin accord with this disposition. No costs. Itis so ORDERED. Charles F
. Lettow Judge

1 Mr. Connors neither defines the "Organization" nor does he make any allegation that it is part of, has a connection with, the Government ofthe United States. Consequently, he has not stated a claim against the only defendant that is cognizable in this court. 2The application for leave to proceed 

### informapauperis is GRANTED. 2
•F«<nralAvla.tiDtlAdminisb'al:ionPersonalInformation:U.S.DepartmentofTransportationFederalAviationAdministrationAirmanDetailsReportTHOMASCLAYTONSTERNBERGAddressisnotavailableMedicalInformation:MedicalClass:Third,MedicalDate:511979MUSTWEARCORRECTIVELENSES.CertificateInformation:Certificate:PRIVATEPILOTDateofIssue:8/12/1976Ratings:PRIVATEPILOTAIRPLANESINGLEENGINELAND
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6953
FREDERICK R. SUMMEY, Petitioner - Appellant, v. AL HAYNES, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (3:05-cv-00109-JPB) Submitted: April 23, 2008 Decided: May 5, 2008 Before TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frederick R. Summey, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Gordon McGonigal, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Frederick R. Summey filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), seeking to challenge his sentence in light of Shepard v. United States , 544 U.S. 13 (2005). The district court construed the § 2241 petition as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Summey asserts that § 2255 is inadequate and ineffective to test the legality of his detention and contends that his claims should be considered under § 2241 pursuant to the savings clause in § 2255. Because Summey does not meet the standard set forth in In re Jones , 226 F.3d 328, 333-34 (4th Cir. 2000), for application of the savings clause, we affirm the district court’s order. 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
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 and in connection with this Annual Report on Form 10-K, that:

     -   the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and
         15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

     -   the information contained in the report fairly presents, on all
         material respects, the Company's financial condition and results of
         operations.

/s/ Duane J. Costenbader
Duane J. Costenbader, Principal Financial Officer

Dated: March 28, 2003
EXHIBIT 32.2

STATEMENT OF CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER                         OF PREMIERE GLOBAL SERVICES, INC.
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO                     ss. 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Premiere Global Services, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Michael E. Havener, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, 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.
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/ Michael E. HavenerMichael E. Havener
                                                              
      Chief Financial Officer
                                                              
      Premiere Global Services, Inc.
                                                              
      August 9, 2007
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| |  | 
| |  | 

---
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  In Re: V ALU F OOD , I NCORPORATED and S O -L O F OODS , I NCORPORATED , Debtors.

T HE O FFICIALC OMMITTEE OF U NSECURED C REDITORS , on behalf of jointly administered bankruptcy No. 01-1866



#  estates of Valu Food, Incorporated, So-Lo Foods, Incorporated,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. H ECHINGERP ROPERTY C OMPANY ,

Defendant-Appellee. 

# 
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-921-S, BK-98-66267-JS, BK-98-66268-JS)

Submitted: December 27, 2001 Decided: January 18, 2002 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL Paul M. Nussbaum, Brent C. Strickland, WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, L.L.P., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. David Dane-man, Kristen Case Lawrence, BISHOP, DANEMAN & REIFF, L.L.C., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

OPINION
PER CURIAM: The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Valu Food, Inc.,and So-Lo Foods, Inc., appeals from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Hechinger Property Company on its motion for payment of rent as a priority, administrative expense of the estate. This court reviews the judgment of a district court sitting in review of a bankruptcy court de novo, applying the same standards of review that were applied in the district court. Three Sisters Partners, L.L.C. v. Harden (In re Shangra-La, Inc.) , 167 F.3d 843, 847 (4th Cir. 1999). Specifically, the bankruptcy court’s factual findings are reviewed for clear error, and legal determinations are reviewed de novo. Loudoun Leasing Dev. Co. v. Ford Motor Credit Co. (In re K & L Lakeland, Inc.) , 128 F.3d 203, 206 (4th Cir. 1997). The facts in this case are undisputed; accordingly, review is de novo. We find that the record supports the bankruptcy court’s conclusion that Hechinger’s rent claim represented an actual and necessary cost of preserving the estate pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(A) (1994). Devan v. Simon DeBartolo Group, L.P. (In re Merry-Go-Round Enters., Inc.) , 180 F.3d 149 (4th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED 2 I N RE V ALU F OOD
a6325310ex1021.htm


 



Exhibit 10.21







[COPYTELE, INC. LETTERHEAD]


 


 


 


March 11, 2009







Videocon Industries Limited


2nd Floor, Fort House, D.N. Road


Fort, Mumbai 400 001 (INDIA)





	
Attention:

	
Venugopal N. Dhoot, Director


	
 

	
Naveen Mandhana, Sr. Vice President











 




Dear Sirs:







With respect to the installment of the Technology Transfer Fee scheduled to be paid to by February 16, 2009 under the Amended and Restated Technology License Agreement between Videocon Industries Limited (“Videocon”) and CopyTele, Inc. (“CopyTele”), dated May 16, 2008 (the “License Agreement”), CopyTele hereby waives the February 16, 2009 due date for such installment payment on the condition (i) that Videocon make two partial payments of such installment, each in the amount of US$250,000, the first no later than March 31, 2009 and the second no later than April 30, 2009, and (ii) that Videocon and CopyTele agree upon a mutually acceptable payment schedule for the balance of such installment prior to July 31, 2009. Except as specifically set forth herein, all terms and conditions of the License Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall continue to be valid and binding upon the parties thereto.







Sincerely,







COPYTELE, INC.












By:  /s/ Denis A. Krusos                                     


Denis A. Krusos


Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 31.2

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

I, Keith Romine, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of TRANSWORLD BENEFITS
INTERNATIONAL, INC.

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and have:

     (a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
          material information relating to the a registrant is made known to me
          by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
          which this quarterly report is being prepared;

     (b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
          and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
          this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

     (c)  presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about effectiveness
          of the disclosure controls and procedures based on my evaluation as of
          the Evaluation Date;

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

     (a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
          controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
          record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
          identified for the registrant's auditors any material weakness in
          internal controls; and

<PAGE>

     (b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          controls; and

6. I have indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant
changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect
internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent evaluation, including
any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses.

Dated: November 19, 2003

/s/ Keith Romine
---------------------------
    Keith Romine
    Chief Financial Officer
Finished Product Packaging and Storage
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF A.A.T., 

A MINOR CHILD

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-17-00130-CV

Appeal from

383rd District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC # 2005AG8332)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in the 

judgment. We therefore reverse the judgment of the court below and remand the cause for further 

proceedings, in accordance with this Court’s opinion. We further order that Appellant recover 

from Appellee all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue, and this decision be certified 

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.