alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IB 

Union Calendar No. 95 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1204 

[Report No. 117–134] 

To amend the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to permit the District 

of Columbia to establish the rate of pay of the Chief Financial Officer 

of the District of Columbia. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 22, 2021 

Ms. NORTON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Reform 

OCTOBER 1 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 30), 2021 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole 

House on the State of the Union, and ordered to be printed 

[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic] 

[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on February 22, 2021] 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1204 RH

A BILL 

To amend the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to permit 

the District of Columbia to establish the rate of pay 

of the Chief Financial Officer of the District of Columbia. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1204 RH

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 ‘‘District of Columbia 

5 Chief Financial Officer Salary Home Rule Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PERMITTING DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TO ESTAB7 LISH RATE OF PAY OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OF8 FICER OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 

9 Section 424(b)(2)(E) of the District of Columbia Home 

10 Rule Act (sec. 1–204.24b(b)(5), D.C. Official Code) is 

11 amended to read as follows: 

12 ‘‘(E) PAY.—The Chief Financial Officer 

13 shall be paid at the greater of— 

14 ‘‘(i) a rate such that the total amount 

15 of compensation paid during any calendar 

16 year is equal to the limit on total pay 

17 which is applicable during such year under 

18 section 5307 of title 5, United States Code, 

19 to an employee described in section 5307(d) 

20 of such title; or 

21 ‘‘(ii) a rate established in law by the 

22 District of Columbia, except that any rate 

23 established under this clause which is appli24 cable to any individual serving as the Chief 

25 Financial Officer shall not be reduced durVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:22 Oct 02, 2021 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6203 E:\BILLS\H1204.RH H1204

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 1204 RH

1 ing any period of such individual’s service 

2 as the Chief Financial Officer.’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 95 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1204 

[Report No. 117–134] 

A BILL 

To amend the District of Columbia Home Rule Act 

O

the District of Columbia. the rate of pay of the Chief Financial Officer of to permit the District of Columbia to establish 

CTOBER 1 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 30), 2021 

Reported with an amendment, committed to the Comand ordered to be printed mittee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Kevin J. TOMLINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-3096

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 29, 2018]

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Mara C. Herbert, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rachael Kaiman, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

*Affirmed.*

Ciklin, Conner and Forst, JJ., concur.
S.M.M., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Joseph SEEBER, Superintendent, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1284

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 11, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
---

# Exhibit 32.1

# Statement of
Chief Executive Officer of RARE Hospitality International, Inc.

# 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 RARE Hospitality International, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 29, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Philip J. Hickey, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2)  The information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in all material  respects,  the financial  condition and results of
         operations of the Company.

/s/ Philip J. Hickey, Jr.
-----------------------------------
Philip J. Hickey, Jr.
Chief Executive Officer
August 12, 2003

A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906,
has been provided to RARE Hospitality International, Inc. and will be retained
by RARE Hospitality International, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EX PARTE Johnathan Michael HOANG

1160358 (CR-15-1134)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

March 10, 2017

Cert. denied.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Edmond Charles BURKE, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11687 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed October 18, 2017

James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Edmond Charles Burke, Pro Se

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Edmond Charles Burke has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Burke has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the áppeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

**Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
* Pursuant to 5 TH CIR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH CIR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-51156 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee
v. JUAN MANUEL TORRES, also known asJuan Manuel Rodriguez, also known as Juan Manuel Torres-Rodriguez Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:07-CR-197-ALL Before KING, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Juan Manuel Torres raises arguments that are forec losed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal of fense. United States v. PinedaArrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 872 (2008). United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D March 5, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-51156

2 The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Order filed January 25, 2013 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-12-01135-CV

____________

IN RE AMERICAN NATIONAL COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE 

COMPANY AND AMERICAN NATIONAL LLOYDS INSURANCE 

COMPANY, Relator

On Appeal from the 212th District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 11CV0882 and 11CV0882-A

ORDER

On December 18, 2012, relators filed a petition for writ of mandamus. See

Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221. Relators ask this Court to order The Honorable 

Susan Criss, Judge of the 212th District Court of Galveston County, Texas, to set 

aside her order dated December 5, 2012, entered in trial court cause number 

11CV0882,

1

styled Jennifer Avery, Individually and as Representative of the Estate 

of Brittiany Yuchnewicz v. Jonathan Hammond, Larry Hammond, and Terrie 

 

1 After the plea to the jurisdiction was denied, the trial court entered an order of severance.
2

Hammond. Relators assert that the trial court abused its discretion in denying their 

plea to the jurisdiction. On January 24, 2013, relators filed in this court an 

emergency motion for stay of the proceedings in the trial court.

It appears from the facts stated in the petition and motion to stay that 

relators’ request for relief requires further consideration and that relators will be 

prejudiced unless immediate temporary relief is granted. See Tex. R. App. p. 

52.8(b), 52.10.

We therefore ORDER that the proceedings of the court below be stayed 

only as to the claims against American National County Mutual Insurance 

Company and American National Lloyds Insurance Company in trial court cause 

numbers 11CV0882 and 11CV0882-A, styled Jennifer Avery, Individually and as 

Representative of the Estate of Brittiany Yuchnewicz v. Jonathan Hammond, Larry 

Hammond, and Terrie Hammond. The proceedings as they relate to such claims 

are stayed until final decision by this Court of relators' petition for writ of 

mandamus, or until further orders of this Court.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Christopher, and Jamison.
Jeremy J. PETERSON, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Shannan M. PETERSON, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1320

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

NOVEMBER 03, 2017

Upon the Court's own motion, it is ordered that this appeal from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Florida is dismissed for failure to comply with this Court's order dated October 11, 2017, and with the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.

ROTHENBERG, C.J., and FERNANDEZ and LUCK, JJ., concur.
STATE EX REL. Andrew D. WETZEL v. STATE of Louisiana

NO. 2017-KH-1297

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 18, 2018

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
September 28, 1997 Form 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-28-1997
<CASH>                                           2,252
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,766
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      4,624
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                16,753
<PP&E>                                          36,737
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,871
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  75,978
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,710
<BONDS>                                         27,276
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            65
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,240
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    75,978
<SALES>                                        125,056
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               125,056
<CGS>                                           42,958
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  104,142
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,813
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,772
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,329
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,582
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,747
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,747
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.69
<FN>
<F1>Current assets include $199 of Assets Held for Sale.
<F2>Currently liabilities include $1,684 of Liabilities realted to Assets held for
Sale.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### Boaz PLEASANT-BEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The CITY OF BALTIMORE, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 17-6039

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 23, 2017

Decided: May 26, 2017

Boaz Pleasant-Bey, Appellant Pro Se.

Before KING, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Boaz Pleasant-Bey appeals the district court’s order denying his civil complaint seeking rejection of his United States citizenship. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Boaz Pleasant-Bey v. The City of Baltimore,*No. 8:16-cv-03879-DKC, 2016 WL 7491624 (D. Md. Dec. 30, 2016). We grant the Appellant’s motion to file a pro se handwritten brief. 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*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted form the Form
10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           6,694
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          10,243
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      6,003
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        167,143
<ALLOWANCE>                                        714
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 229,026
<DEPOSITS>                                     169,148
<SHORT-TERM>                                    30,624
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             11,645
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                      17,609
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 229,026
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 13,381
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  228
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   446
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                14,055
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               6,345
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,560
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            5,495
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       60
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 15,645
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    715
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         635
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       635
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.23
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0<F1>
<LOANS-NON>                                      5,761
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  5,404    
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0<F1>
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0<F1>
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>This information is not disclosed in the form 10QSB.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-20069 

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

NAM VAN NGUYEN,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. CR-H-94-0142-02

- - - - - - - - - -

December 21, 1995

Before WIENER, PARKER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This is a direct appeal from a guilty-plea conviction for

conspiracy to make, utter, and possess counterfeit check and to

commit bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371. Appellant

contends that the district court failed to make specific factual

findings concerning the relevant conduct attributable to him as

required by Rule 32(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal

Procedure. We have reviewed the record and find that the
No. 95-20069

-2-

district court complied with Rule 32. Accordingly, we affirm the

sentence imposed by the district court.

AFFIRMED.
Deangelo HOLLOWAY v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

CR-16-0068

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017 Reh. denied March 31, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
### Regular Totals (Operators)

Airport = JFK Season = S Operator = 0001(Exclude) Status Date = 07/01/2010 (Current & Future) 12/21/2010 08:09:36



### Query Parameters:

### 12/21/2010 08:09:36

Carrier 

### Regular Totals (Operators) Excludes FAA Held Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded JFK Season = SUMMER PF7 Status Date = 07/01/2010 (Current & Future)

JFK

129 AAL AMERICAN AIRLINES 1 AAR ASIANA AIRLINES 1 ABX ABX AIR 2 AEA AIR EUROPA 2 AEW AEROSVIT AIRLINES 2 AFL AEROFLOT 10 AFR AIR FRANCE 6 AIC AIR INDIA 5 AJM AIR JAMAICA 7 AMX AEROMEXICO 2 ANA ALL NIPPON AIRWAYS 1 ARA ARIK AIR 2 AUA AUSTRIAN 4 AVA AVIANCA 5 AZA ALITALIA 19 BAW BRITISH AIRWAYS 2 BER AIR BERLIN 6 BWA CARIBBEAN AIRLINES 6 CAA ATLANTIC SOUTHEAST AIRLINES (code 2 CAO AIR CHINA CARGO 2 CAY CAYMAN AIRWAYS 2 CCA AIR CHINA 3 CES CHINA EASTERN AIRLINES 20 CHQ CHAUTAUQUA 1 CMP COPA AIRLINES 119 COM COMAIR AIRLINES 6 CPA CATHAY PACIFIC 8 CPZ COMPASS AIRLINES 202 DAL DELTA AIR LINES 1 DHL DHL 8 DLH DEUTSCHE LUFTHANSA 62 EGF AMR EAGLE HOLDING COPR. (FORMERLY 6 EIN AER LINGUS 4 ELY EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINES 2 ETD ETIHAD 4 FDX FED EX 2 FIN FINNAIR 13 FLG PINNACLE AIRLINES (dba NORTHWEST 4 IBE IBERIA AIRWAYS 4 ICE ICELANDAIR 2 JAI JET AIRWAYS 2 JAL JAPAN AIR LINES 348 JBU JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORP. 1 KAC KUWAIT AIRWAYS 3 KAL KOREAN AIR 4 KLM KLM ROYAL DUTCH 6 LAN LAN CHILE 2 LNE LAN ECUADOR 4 LOT LOT - POLISH AIRLINES 6 MES MESABA AVIATION 2 MSR EGYPT AIR

Page 2

### 12/21/2010 08:09:36

Carrier 

### Regular Totals (Operators) Excludes FAA Held Slots Held less than 5 days are Excluded JFK Season = SUMMER PF7 Status Date = 07/01/2010 (Current & Future)

JFK

7 MXA MEXICANA DE AVIACION 2 QFA QANTAS AIRLINES 2 QTR QATAR AIRWAYS 2 RAM ROYAL AIR MAROC 2 RJA ROYAL JORDANIAN 3 RPA REPUBLIC AIRLINES 2 SAA SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS 4 SCX SUN COUNTRY AIRLINES, INC. 2 SIA SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED 6 SWR SWISS INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES (SWISSAIR 2 TAI TACA AIRLINES 4 TAM TAM BRAZILIAN AIRLINES 2 THY TURKISH AIRLINES, INC. 4 UAE EMIRATES 25 UAL UNITED AIRLINES 1 UPS UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 7 USA US AIRWAYS 6 VIR VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIR 19 VRD VIRGIN AMERICA

Page 3
Janice HART-GALLIMORE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Randy L. Hart, Appellant, v. MICHELIN NORTH AMERICA, INC., a Foreign Corporation, Tire Centers, LLC, a Foreign Limited Liability Company, Mack Trucks, Inc., a Foreign Corporation, and Southern Waste Systems, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Appellees.

No. 3D16-2887

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### Anthony Charles ALTO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ronald DAVIS, Acting Warden, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 11-16431

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 8, 2017 *

Filed March 14, 2017

Anthony Charles Alto, Pro Se

Attorney General, Esquire, AGCA—Of-fice of the Attorney General (San Diego), San Diego, CA, Michael G. Lagrama, AGCA—Office of the California Attorney General, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent-Appellee

*629Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See.*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Anthony Charles Alto appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging a 2009 decision by the Board of Parole Hearings denying parole and deferring his next parole hearing for ten years in accordance with California Penal Code § 3041.5 (“Marsy’s Law”). We dismiss.

This court issued a certificate of appeal-ability (“COA”) on whether application of Marsy’s Law to delay Alto’s next parole hearing for ten years violates the Ex Post Facto Clause. We vacate the COA as improvidently granted and dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. *See Nettles v. Grounds,*830 F.3d 922, 934-35 (9th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (holding that claims fall outside “the core of habeas corpus” if success will not necessarily' lead to immediate or earlier release from confinement), *cert. denied,*580 U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 645, 196 L.Ed.2d 542 (2017); *Phelps v. Alameda,*366 F.3d 722, 727-28, 730 (9th Cir. 2004) (merits panel has the.power to rule on the propriety of a COA).

The dismissal of this appeal does not preclude Alto from pursuing conditions of confinement claims in a properly filed civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

We treat Alto’s additional argument as a motion to expand the COA. So treated, the motion is denied. *See*9th Cir. R. 22-1(e); *Hiivala v. Wood,*195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999).

All pending motions are denied as moot.

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.