alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1

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

         In connection with the Annual Report of GREM USA (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof ("Report"), the undersigned,
in the capacities and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant 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
                  operations of the Company.

Dated: APRIL 15, 2008                             /S/ EDWARD MIERS
       --------------                             ----------------
                                                  Edward Miers
                                                  Chief Executive Officer
                                                  Principal Accounting Officer
Catina HADLEY, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Leonel E. CANTRERAS-GOMEZ, et al., Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-2191

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

November 02, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
## MEMORANDUM

**DATE:** 11/2 5 /14 **FROM:** Ken Mitchell/EPA Region 4 **TO:** Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR – 2013
- 0602 **SUBJECT:** Discussion of the Clean Power Plan at the 7th Enlightenment Luncheon organized by

Mothers and Others for Clean Air
**SUMMARY :**  

### EPA R4 provided information on the Clean Power Plan to participants at the 7th Enlightenment Luncheon organized by Mothers and Others for Clean Air (a program of the American Lung Association in Georgia) 

### in Atlanta, GA, on October 3, 2014 

### . The Clea n Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was p roposed on June 2, 2014. **ATTENDEES :**  **EPA** Heather McTeer Toney/EPA R4 Bryan Myers/EPA R4 Brandi Jenkins/EPA R4 Jayvone Hick
- White/EPA R4 **External Stakeholders**  Dr. Marshall Shepherd/University of GA Atmospheric Sciences Program Dr. George Luber/CDC LeRoy M. Graham, Jr. / Georgia Pedia tric Pulmonology Associates, PC Sam Champion /The Weather Channel Laura Turner - Seydel/Turner Foundation Stephanie Blank/A rthur Blank Foundation Approximately 200 additional participants
**EXHIBIT - 32.1**

 

MOSSIMO,INC.

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO

SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofMossimo, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the Report), I Mossimo Giannulli, Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, certify, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that tothe best of my knowledge:

 

(1)              The Report, to which this certification is attached as Exhibit -32.1, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities and Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 
| /s/    | Mossimo Giannulli                       |   |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Mossimo Giannulli                       |
|   | Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer |
|   | August 11, 2005                    |

 

A SIGNED ORIGINAL OF THIS WRITTENSTATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 HASBEEN PROVIDED TO THE COMPANY AND WILL BE RETAINED BY THE COMPANY AND FURNISHEDTO THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION STAFF UPON REQUEST.

 

THIS CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANIES THE FORM 10-QTO WHICH IT RELATES, IS NOT DEEMED FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGECOMMISSION AND IS NOT TO BE INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO A FILING OF THECOMPANY UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 OR THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1934 (WHETHERMADE BEFORE OR AFTER THE DATE OF THE FORM 10-Q), IRRESPECTIVE OF ANYGENERAL INCORPORATION LANGUAGE CONTAINED IN SUCH FILING.

 

----
**Exhibit 32(b)**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

OF QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q 

OF PINNACLEDATA SYSTEMS, INC. 

FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2007 

The undersigned is the Chief Financial Officer of Pinnacle Data Systems, Inc. (the “Issuer”). This certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This certificationaccompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Issuer for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007. 

I, George A. Troutman, certify that,the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and that information contained inthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer. 

Thiscertification is executed as of November 14, 2007.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
unaudited financial statements dated June 30, 1999 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                         6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                              429,000
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    18,760,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1,078,000
<INVENTORY>                                      21,212,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 39,609,000
<PP&E>                                           23,467,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                   14,642,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   49,069,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            45,243,000
<BONDS>                                           1,535,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             52,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       (1,918,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     49,069,000
<SALES>                                          22,010,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 22,010,000
<CGS>                                            20,449,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5,855,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    (13,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1,215,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (5,496,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         35,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (5,531,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (5,531,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         (1.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (1.17)


<FN>
* Dollar amounts are based on conversion rate of 1,880 Lire to the Dollar which
prevailed on June 30, 1999
</FN>


</TABLE>
Exhibit
      32.1











CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO


18
        U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002














In
        connection with the Quarterly Report of Capital Corp of the West (the "Company")
        on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas T. Hawker,
        President and 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.














Date:
                May 9, 2007
            By:/s/
                Thomas T. HawkerThomas
                T. HawkerPresident
                andChief
                Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report of CoreStream Energy, Inc., formerly known
as  Zealous,  Inc.  (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December
31, 2009 as filed with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date
hereof  (the  "Report"),  Chris Rainbolt, Chief Executive and Primary Financial
Officer of the Company, do  certify,  pursuant  to  18  U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act  of 2002, that to his
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 operations of the Company.

Dated: August 18, 2010


-----------------------
By: /s/ Chris Rainbolt
Its:  Chief Executive and Primary Financial Officer
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN

f ~010 ZVZ of thb 

### Qoa8tftutfoa dbo&wu
ahnil hold or a&lre ES bhr th8a oab olril Of$iOb of bmd‘taTV that of ;TuBt10. of Pbaoo, QoantrHonorabie hank B. Lloyd, pig. 2 .~

The or.rIoa or cloudy aoml8sIoner being speolally wroeptad In thI8'SeotIon tha oaaa stated by you does not oome +lthin the prohlbltlontharaoi.

Thera 18, howaver, anotherprohibition against duel, .orriae holUIngpredIoeted upan the inoompatIbIlItp or the re- ~speotire

offloem,whathsr suoh 

### orrio oqaa wIthIn the axpro p,roh.tbItiqp

S$~&aw dr 

### nbt; Who prohIbItIonot suoh dual orrio. holdIngw~th'~bi~ot'to~ino~~tIble offioaa is grounded upon the 8oundr8t'publI8 policy and 18 w6l.l entablishadIn the daol8Ion8 of thi8 Z&at& See Blenoourtf. Parker, 27 T&x. 558s IState T. Btiakaahorr~ 66 Tax. 45.t Thomas f. Absmathy Oounty Ltno Indo 51 8. w. senbutt 6ahool DiettrIat, 290 8. ~W.,l52;

8tato Y. Martin, 28) 

### 8s 808 aho our OpInlonWo: Q-2640.whoraIn wo abrirrod'upbn

tha.authorItW

Of 8uoh'doaIlrIOnil

that tha 9tl$es8 of Justloo OS the Peaoo andCountp CORDOI~SIOB~~ wera tneompatible InthI8, that the OonrmiasiOne+s~ Court Ia required by law to approro the.aoodunta or JustIoe8 'of

tha.Peaoor0r roe8 in orblndt aotions.
A oe@eful madIng or .tho tiok oradioatlonlaw,~(E. B. lfo. 77,. Qh. 53, PIrat &llad~See~on, &lab Lag181atur8k;oolr-.oon- ~iinoo8 us that the dutIb8 or the LIventookSanitary Cotissbn mombsra and ot.thomember8 c$ tho Corina18sIoner8t Court ara inoompatlbleIn thI8, that by Seation 5 of that Aot (anb l laawhera therein)the LIre8took ShnItsrJr ~OmmIseIon'

Is given broads

pow018 with respoot to the exsrolseof which there Is Imposed upon the OommI8sioner8'

Court of any oounty afreotod thereby the duty OS oomplylng and oooperatlng to the extant of oo.nstru~tIng or supplyIng,all

neoeasaryfaoIlltIe8for the purpose of dipping oattlo, horses,mules, jaok8 and jonnat under the 8upervIeIonof the Inspeotorsor the Lite8tookSanitaryOonnuIssfon, euoh iaaflitiier to be furnishedat the oxpenw or the County.

The law thus praaorlbing tha re8paotivedutIe8 of. members of the SanitaryCommIs8ionand the County OommIsaloner8 - the ona being prImam and paramount,the other being seoondary and 8ubordInete~nneoesearIly oreateean Inoompatlbility that. , . ..-. 

### 720

Boaorablo Prank 8. Lloyd, pago 

## 3

would **forbid** one por8on holding and 

### l xoroIai.n(& both OmOO8 at tho 8=. tiS8.

fntr the80 OOlZ8fdOMtiOll8 ib fOuW8 that yourinquIry 8hould bo amwere in the drimdir0. row8 very bruly,
#### Thomas Hunscom *versus*Polly Hunscom.

The disbelief of a future state of existence goes only to the credibility of a witness

This was a libel for a divorce *a vinculo.*On the trial, a witness being offered to prove the adultery, *Wilson,*for the respondent, objected to his being sworn, and founded his objection to the competency of the witness upon his professed disbelief of a future state of existence, and offered to prove his repeated declarations of such disbelief. But *the Court*admitted him to be sworn, and said the objection went only to his credibility, *(a)*

(a)

**In *Wakefield*vs. *Ross,*(5 *Mason,*16,) Mr. Justice *Story*held that a person who did not believe in the existence of a God, or a future state of existence, was not a competent witness. Such, undoubtedly, is the law of *England.*“ Our law,” says an *English*writer on evidence, of great authority, “ like that of most other civilized countries, requires a witness to believe that there is a God, and a future state of rewards and punishments.” “ It may now be considered as an established rule,” says the same writer, “ that infidels of any other country, who believe in a God, the avenger of falsehood, ought to be received here as witnesses; but infidels, who believe not that there is a God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, cannot be admitted in any ease.” — 1 *Phillips's Ev.,*pp. 21, 22., 7th *Lond.*ed. — And see *Jackson*vs. *Gridley,*18 *Johns. R.*98. — *Butts*vs. *Swatwood,*2 *Cowen,*431—572.— *Curtis*vs. *Strong,*4 *Day,*51. — *Atwood vs. Welton,7 Conn. R.*66. — *State*vs. *Cooper,*2 *Tenn R.*96.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jonathan RUCKMAN, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11414 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed June 1, 2017

*190James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jonathan Ruckman, Pro Se

Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Jonathan Ruckman 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). Ruckman 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 appeal 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.
ex10-11b.htm


Exhibit 10.11(b)


 


SECOND AMENDMENT


 


This Second Amendment (the “Amendment”) is made and entered into this 6th day of March, 2012, by and among NuGlow Cosmaceuticals, LLC (“NuGlow”), Camden Street Partners, LLC (“Camden”) and Helix BioMedix, Inc. (“HXBM”) and amends that certain Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of NuGlow Cosmaceuticals, LLC dated July 1, 2010 by and among NuGlow, Camden and HXBM, as amended (the “LLC Agreement”).








	
1. 

	
Consent/Amendment.












(a)           Pursuant to Section 5.5 of the LLC Agreement, HXBM hereby consents to the payment to Steven Sheiner of $5,000 per month in his capacity and as consideration for his services as an employee of NuGlow commencing March 1, 2012.







(b)           In consideration of the foregoing, HXBM’s purchase option described in Section 9.9(a) of the LLC Agreement shall hereby be extended until the seventh anniversary of the date of the LLC Agreement.








	
2. 

	
Force and Effect.












The remainder of the LLC Agreement is not amended hereby and shall remain in full force and effect.  The parties hereby ratify and confirm the terms and conditions of the LLC Agreement, as amended by this Amendment.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Amendment to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date first set forth above.


 




	NUGLOW COSMACEUTICALS, LLC	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
By: 

	/s/ Steven Sheiner	 	 
	 	
Name: Steven Sheiner

	 	 
	 	
Title: Managing Member of Camden Street Partners, LLC, its Manager

	 	 
	 	 	 	 







 




	CAMDEN STREET PARTNERS, LLC	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
By: 

	/s/ Steven Sheiner	 	 
	 	
Name: Steven Sheiner

	 	 
	 	
Title: Managing Member

	 	 
	 	 	 	 










	HELIX BIOMEDIX, INC.	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
By: 

	/s/ R. Stephen Beatty	 	 
	 	
Name: R. Stephen Beatty

	 	 
	 	
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 36 (Wednesday, February 23, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10213-10214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03842]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[FRS 71961]

Radio Broadcasting Services; AM or FM Proposals To Change the 
Community of License

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DATES: The agency must receive comments on or before April 25, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 45 L Street NE, 
Washington, DC 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rolanda F. Smith, 202-418-2054.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following applicants filed AM or FM 
proposals to change the community of license: IGLESIA PENTECOSTAL 
VISPERA DEL FIN, KZGD(AM), Fac. ID No. 72475, From SALEM, OR, To 
HUBBARD, OR, File No. BP-20220117AAA; SSR COMMUNICATIONS, INC., 
KCAY(FM), Fac. ID No. 203590, From CALIENTE, NV, To DAMMERON VALLEY, 
UT, File No. 0000178430; JUAN CARLOS MATOS BARRETO, KEHD(FM), Fac. ID 
No. 762515, From BIG LAKE, TX, To MIDKIFF, TX, File No. 0000178378; 
ESTRELLA BROADCASTING LLC, KVRQ(FM), Fac. ID No. 198802, From MULESHOE, 
TX, To TEXICO, NM, File No. 0000179229; LAZER LICENSES, LLC, KXRS(FM), 
Fac. ID No. 36829, From HEMET, CA, To BEAUMONT, CA, File No. 
0000178819; ESTRELLA BROADCASTING, LLC, NEW(FM), Fac. ID No. 762491, 
From OVERGAARD, AZ, To BLUE RIDGE, AZ, File No. 0000159314; FAMILY LIFE 
MINISTRIES, INC., WCOR-FM, Fac. ID No. 21197, From PORTVILLE, NY, To 
LEWIS RUN, PA, File No. 0000182214; EAST TENNESSEE RADIO GROUP III, 
L.P., WQMT(FM), Fac. ID No. 70782, From DECATUR, TN, To HOPEWELL, TN, 
File No. 0000180848; CALVARY CHAPEL OF RUSSELL, WTWT(FM), Fac. ID No. 
172674, From BRADFORD, PA, To PORTVILLE, NY, File No. 0000182212; THE 
POWER FOUNDATION, WWQS(FM), Fac. ID

[[Page 10214]]

No. 173912, From SPRING CITY, TN, To DECATUR, TN, File No. 0000180811; 
and RADIOACTIVE, LLC, WKFC(FM), Fac. ID No. 164241, From NORTH CORBIN, 
KY, To HUSTONVILLE, KY, File No. 0000145184. The full text of these 
applications is available electronically via the Media Bureau's 
Consolidated Data Base System, https://licensing.fcc.gov/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/app_sear.htm or Licensing and Management System (LMS), 
https://apps2int.fcc.gov/dataentry/public/tv/publicAppSearch.html.

Federal Communications Commission.
Nazifa Sawez,
Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2022-03842 Filed 2-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
```
#### Richard L. LATHAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Clark E. DUCART, Warden; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-15633

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted September 26, 2017 *

FILED OCTOBER 4, 2017

Richard L. Lathan, Crescent City, CA, pro se.

Sharon Anne Garske, Office of the Attorney General, Oakland, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM ***

California state prisoner Richard L. La-than appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a First Amendment access-to-courts claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Williams v. Paramo,*775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Lathan did not exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing this action and failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether there was “something in his particular case that made the existing and generally available administrative remedies effectively unavailable to him.” *Albino v. Baca,*747 F.3d 1162, 1172 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc); *see Woodford v. Ngo,*548 U.S. 81, 90, 126 S.Ct 2378, 165 L.Ed.2d 368 (2006) (“[Pjroper exhaustion of administrative remedies ... means using all steps that the agency holds out, and doing so *properly*(so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits).” (citation, and internal quotation marks omitted)); *McKinney v. Carey,*311 F.3d 1198, 1199-1200 (9th Cir. 2002) (a grievance must be fully exhausted before a § 1983 action is filed; exhaustion during the pendency of the litigation is insufficient because exhaustion is a precondition to suit).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Lathan’s motion tq compel discovery because Lathan failed to meet and confer with defendants. *See*Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(1) (motion to compel discovery must include certification that mov-ant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with opposing party); N.D. Cal. Civ. R. 37-1 (requirement to confer in good faith); *Hallett v. Morgan,*296 F.3d 732, 751 (9th Cir. 2002) (standard of review).

To the extent that Lathan appeals the district court’s denial of George Hamilton’s motion to intervene in this action, we conclude that Lathan lacks standing to challenge the denial. *See In re Cinematronics,**380916 F.2d 1444, 1448 (9th Cir. 1990) (a party may only appeal to protect its own interests).

Lathan’s motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 31) is denied.

AFFIRMED.

***

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