alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral

argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is

therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This Order and Judgment is

not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata,

and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and

judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and

conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

FEB 23 2001

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ROBERTO BARAJAS,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-5067

(D.C. No. 99-CR-66-C)

(N.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before EBEL, KELLY and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

Defendant-Appellant Roberto Barajas pled guilty on September 7, 1999, to

one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute

methamphetamine and cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and

841(b)(1)(A)(ii)(II) and (viii). He entered into a standard plea agreement. It

provided that Barajas was responsible for approximately ten pounds (4.5
- 2 -

kilograms) of methamphetamine. The plea agreement permitted Barajas to appeal

only his sentence. Pursuant to the plea agreement, Barajas fully cooperated with

the United States government, and thus the government recommended a two-point

downward departure for substantial assistance in accordance with United States

Sentencing Guideline § 5K1.1. The government also recommended that Barajas

receive a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility pursuant to

U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1. The sentencing court adopted those recommendations, and it

also found Barajas eligible for the “safety valve” provision under U.S.S.G.

§ 5C1.2 and 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f). Consequently, on April 10, 2000, the court

found Barajas had a total offense level, after all reductions, of twenty-seven and a

criminal history category of I, giving a sentencing range of seventy to eightyseven months. The court sentenced Barajas to seventy months imprisonment, five

years supervised release, $750 fine, and $100 special monetary assessment.

Barajas appealed alleging that he was not treated fairly by the sentencing

court. His attorney filed a brief with this court pursuant to Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that “[a]fter a conscientious examination of the

record below, and issue presented in this appeal having been thoroughly

researched, it is counsel’s belief that there is no merit to the issue.” (Br. at 2.) 

Pursuant to our duty under Anders, we conducted an independent review of his
- 3 -

sentence, see id. at 744, and we agree that the appeal is frivolous. Therefore, we

GRANT counsel’s request to withdraw and DISMISS the appeal. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

David M. Ebel

Circuit Judge
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OMAR CRUZ

- VILLASENOR,

Petitioner,

v.

WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 18

- 71989

Agency No. A213

- 043

- 938

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 11, 2019 **

Before: C ANBY, GRABER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Omar Cruz

- Villasenor, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review

of the Board of Immigrat ion Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an

immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of

removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for s ubstantial evidence the

* 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 o ral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 18 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 71989

agency’s factual findings. Silaya v. Mukasey , 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008).

We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Cruz

Villasenor failed to establish a well

- founded fear of future persecution in Mexico

.

See Gu v. Gonzales

, 454 F.3d 1014, 10 22 (9th Cir. 2006) ( petitioner failed to

present “compelling, objective evidence demonstrating a well

- founded fear of

persecution” ); see also Gonzalez

- Medina v. Holder , 641 F.3d 33 3, 338 (9th Cir.

2011) (in the absence of past persecution, the burden is on the applicant to show

that relocation would be unreasonable)

. Thus, Cruz

- Villasenor’s asylum claim

fails.

In this case, because Cruz

- Villasenor failed to establish eligibility for

asylum, he failed to establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Zehatye v.

Gonzales , 453 F.3d 1182, 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because

Cruz

- Vi llasenor failed to show it is more likely than not that he would be tortured

by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico

.

See Aden v. Holder , 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
# Official Journal C 150/5 Ju

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 150 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 475 June 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 150

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 475 June 2004

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Council |
| 2004/C 150/1 | Communication relating to the opening of the quotas laid down by the Council Decision of 15 December 2003 on trade in certain steel products between the European Community and Ukraine | 1 |
| | Commission |
| 2004/C 150/2 | Euro exchange rates | 20 |
| 2004/C 150/3 | New composition of the European Consumer Consultative Group | 21 |
| 2004/C 150/4 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case No. COMP/M.3375 - Statoil/SDS) (1) | 22 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Council

2004/C 150/1

Communication relating to the opening of the quotas laid down by the Council Decision of 15 December 2003 on trade in certain steel products between the European Community and Ukraine

1

Commission

2004/C 150/2

Euro exchange rates

20

2004/C 150/3

New composition of the European Consumer Consultative Group

21

2004/C 150/4

Prior notification of a concentration (Case No. COMP/M.3375 - Statoil/SDS) (1)

22

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### WRITERS GUILD OF AMERICA, WEST, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, and Mark Distefano and Guinevere Turner, Plaintiffs, v. BTG PRODUCTIONS, LLC, Defendant, v. Myriad Pictures, Inc., Third-party-defendant-Appellee.

No. 16-55332

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted November 9, 2017 * Pasadena, California

Filed January 05, 2018

Jonathan Michael Cohen, Attorney, Anthony Segall, Rothner, Segall *&*Green-stone, Pasadena, CA, Heather L. Pearson, Writers Guild of America, West Inc., Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant

John Michael Gatti, Esquire, Attorney, Benjamin G. Shatz, Attorney, Manatt, Phelps *&*Phillips, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Third-party-defendant-Appellee

Before: REINHARDT and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and DANIEL,** District Judge.

*

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

**

 The Honorable Wiley Y. Daniel, United States District Judge for the U.S. District Court for Colorado, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Writers Guild of America, West, Inc. (“Writers Guild”) appeals the district court’s order denying its motion to amend a judgment against BTG Productions LLC (“BTG”). Writers Guild sought to add Myriad Pictures (“Myriad”) as a judgment debtor on the grounds that Myriad was the alter ego of BTG. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand to the district court.

1. The dispute involves a collective bargaining agreement. Accordingly, the federal rather than the state test for determining alter ego applies. We remand for the application by the district court of the federal test in *United Ass’n of Journeymen & Apprentices Local 343 v. Nor-Cal Plumbing, Inc.,*48 F.3d 1465, 1470-71, 1473 (9th Cir. 1994). The record before us indicates that Myriad Pictures is the alter ego of BTG Productions LLC and was a *459controlling party in the litigation. To the extent that the district court may determine that an evidentiary hearing is required to resolve that question finally, it may conduct one.

2. The district court did not err in finding that Writers Guild of America, West, Inc.’s motion to amend the judgment eight months after the order was timely. *See Cigna Property & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Polaris Pictures Corp.,*159 F.3d 412, 421 (9th Cir. 1998) (holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by granting a motion to amend the judgment seven and a half months after the order).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
|          |                   
|--------- | ------------------
|<PAGE> 44 | Form 10-Q - Part I

Exhibit 32

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

The undersigned, Patricia F. Russo, Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of Lucent Technologies Inc. (the Company), and John A. Kritzmacher,
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that:

| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) | the Quarterly
  Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended March 31,
  2006 (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. 78m or 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.                                                                                                

Date: May 9, 2006

|                                       | 
|-------------------------------------- | 
|/s/ Patricia F.
  Russo                | 
|                                       | 
|Patricia F. Russo                      | 
|Chairman and Chief
  Executive Officer | 
|                                       | 
|/s/ John A.
  Kritzmacher              | 
|                                       | 
|John A. Kritzmacher                    | 
|Chief Financial Officer                | 
|                                       | 

---
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 314 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 314

 Authorizing the President of the Senate, the President of the Senate 
  pro tempore, and the majority and minority leaders to make certain 
  appointments after the sine die adjournment of the present session.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 3, 1996

 Mr. Lott submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Authorizing the President of the Senate, the President of the Senate 
  pro tempore, and the majority and minority leaders to make certain 
  appointments after the sine die adjournment of the present session.

    Resolved, That notwithstanding the sine die adjournment of the 
present session of the Congress, the President of the Senate, the 
President of the Senate pro tempore, the majority leader of the Senate, 
and the minority leader of the Senate be, and they are hereby, 
authorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards, 
conferences, or interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by 
concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.
                                 <all>
```
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6474 

To eliminate the daily newspaper cross-ownership rule of the Federal 

Communications Commission. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 7, 2016 

Mr. WALDEN (for himself, Mr. YARMUTH, Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. 

RUSH, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. OLSON, and Mr. GUTHRIE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To eliminate the daily newspaper cross-ownership rule of 

the Federal Communications Commission. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF DAILY NEWSPAPER CROSS4 OWNERSHIP RULE. 

5 (a) NO FORCE OR EFFECT.—Paragraph (d) of sec6 tion 73.3555 of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, 

7 shall have no force or effect after the date of the enact8 ment of this Act. 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6474 IH

1 (b) REMOVAL FROM RULES.—Not later than 1 year 

2 after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal 

3 Communications Commission shall complete all actions 

4 necessary to remove such paragraph from its rules. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Certification of Chief
Executive Officer

In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Pure Bioscience (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter
ended October 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Michael L. Krall, Chief Executive Officer 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.

|                  |                                                              
|----------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------
|December 13, 2006 | /s/ Michael L. Krall
Michael L. Krall
Chief Executive Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Javier Toshiro TOKUNAGA-FUJIGAKI, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-50468

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 14, 2017 * Pasadena, California

Filed December 22, 2017

Emily J. Keifer, Janet Cabral, Helen H. Hong, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Michael Marks, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: REINHARDT, GILMAN,** and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

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

**

The Honorable Ronald Lee Gilman, United States Circuit Judge for the United States' Court 'of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Javier Tokunaga-Fujigaki appeals the sentence imposed upon remand because the district court’s oral pronouncement at sentencing did not include a term of supervised release, but the written judgment imposed a three-year term of supervised-release. Tokunaga-Fujigaki asserts on appeal that the oral pronouncement should control and, as a result, his sentence should not include a supervised release terra. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we reverse and remand.

The original sentence was fully vacated, and thus the original term of supervised release was also vacated. The district court’s oral pronouncement as correctly reported determines the correct sentence. It is well-settled that where there is a discrepancy between an unambiguous oral pronouncement of the sentence and the written judgment, the oral pronouncement controls. *United States v. Munoz-Dela Rosa,*495 F.2d 253, 256 (9th Cir. 1974). *369Here, the district court’s oral pronouncement is unambiguous because it has only one reasonable reading, *see United States v. Allen,*157 F.3d 661, 667-68 (9th Cir. 1998), and the district court’s omission of the supervised release term in the oral pronouncement does not lead to an absurd, irrational or illegal result, see *Fenner v. United States Parole Comm’n,*251 F.3d 782, 786-87 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding that the exclusion of a statutorily-mandated parole term in a sentence rendered the sentence irrational, illegal, and ambiguous).

On remand, the district court shall strike the challenged supervised release term and conditions in the written judgment to conform to the oral pronouncement of sentence. *United States v. Hernandez,*795 F.3d 1159, 1169 (9th Cir. 2015), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 1204, 194 L.Ed.2d 210 (2016).

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 11

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Permitting the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for

days of remembrance of victims of the Holocaust.a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 11

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the rotunda of the Capitol is authorized

3 to be used from 8 o’clock ante meridiem until 3 o’clock

4 post meridiem on May 8, 1997, for a ceremony as part

5 of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of vic6 tims of the Holocaust. Physical preparations for the cere7 mony shall be carried out in accordance with such condi8 tions as the Architect of the Capitol may prescribe.

Passed the House of Representatives March 21,

1997.

Attest:

Clerk.
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6401 

To amend Public Law 94–241 with respect to the Northern Mariana Islands. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 29, 2016 

Mr. SABLAN (for himself and Mrs. RADEWAGEN) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently 

determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend Public Law 94–241 with respect to the Northern 

Mariana Islands. 

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 ‘‘Northern Mariana Is5 lands Economic Expansion Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA IS7 LANDS: TRANSITIONAL WORKERS. 

8 Section 6 of Public Law 94–241 (48 U.S.C. 1806) 

9 is amended— 


lotter on DSK3GDR082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6401 IH

1 (1) in subsection (a)(6), by striking ‘‘$150’’ and 

2 inserting ‘‘$200’’; and 

3 (2) in subsection (d)(2)— 

4 (A) by striking the period at the end of the 

5 first sentence and inserting ‘‘, except a permit 

6 for construction occupations (as that term is 

7 defined by the Department of Labor as Stand8 ard Occupational Classification Group 47–0000 

9 or any successor provision) shall only be issued 

10 to extend a permit first issued before October 

11 1, 2015.’’; and 

12 (B) by striking the period at the end of the 

13 third sentence and inserting ‘‘, except that for 

14 fiscal year 2017 the number of permits issued 

15 shall not exceed 15,000.’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK3GDR082PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 31.1

SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF PLUSH MALL, INC.

I, Lorne Reicher, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Plush Mall, Inc.;

2.  Based on my  knowledge,  this  annual  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 annual
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included  in this annual  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 annual report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to us by others  within those  entities,  particularly  during the
period in which this annual 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 annual
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

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

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing 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 weaknesses in internal controls; and,

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. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
annual report whether there were significant  changes in internal controls or in
other factors that could  significantly  affect internal controls  subsequent to
the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective  actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: May 29, 2007                   /s/ Lorne Reicher
                                     ------------------------------------------
                                     Lorne Reicher
                                     President