alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Vanessa RIVERA, as an individual and on behalf of all employees similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UHS OF DELAWARE, INC., DBA Universal Health Services of Delaware, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-56972

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted November 16, 2017 * Pasadena, California

Filed December 1, 2017

Joseph Antonelli, Esquire, Attorney, Janelle C. Carney, Esquire, Attorney, Law Office of Joseph Antonelli, Chino Hills, CA, Sahag Majarían, II, Esquire, Attorney, Sahag Majarían II Law Offices, Tar-zana, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Khatereh Sage Fahimi, Esquire, Attorney, Christina H. Hayes, Stacey Eileen James, Esquire, Attorney, Littler Mendel-son, P.C., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant

Before: NGUYEN and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and SEEBORG,** 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 Richard Seeborg, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

UHS of Delaware, Inc. appeals the district court’s order finding unenforceable a provision in an arbitration agreement that waives representative claims under California’s Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”). Reviewing the order *de novo, see Kilgore v. KeyBank, Nat’l Ass’n,*718 F.3d 1052, 1057 (9th Cir. 2013) (en banc) (citation omitted), we affirm.1

UHS argues that *DirecTV, Inc. v. Imburgia,*- U.S.-, 136 S.Ct. 463, 193 L.Ed.2d 365 (2015), abrogated *Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America, Inc.,*803 F.3d 425 (9th Cir. 2015), and *Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles,*LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348, 173 Cal.Rptr.3d 289, 327 P.3d 129 (2014), and therefore the district court’s reliance on *Sakkab*and *Iskanian*was erroneous. We disagree and conclude that *Imburgia*is not clearly irreconcilable with *Sakkab*or *Iskanian. See Miller v. Gammie,*335 F.3d 889, 900 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). *Imburgia*simply held that a California court failed to place arbitration *594contracts “on equal footing with all other contracts” when it interpreted a choice-of-law provision in an arbitration agreement. 136 S.Ct. at 468-71 (quoting *Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna,*546 U.S. 440, 443, 126 S.Ct. 1204, 163 L.Ed.2d 1038 (2006)). *Sakkab*and *Iskanian,*in contrast, directly addressed the validity of PAGA waivers in arbitration agreements under state and federal law. *Sakkab,*803 F.3d at 431—40; *Iskanian,*59 Cal. 4th at 378-89, 173 Cal.Rptr.3d 289, 327 P.3d 129. Therefore, neither case is undermined by *Imburgia.*

AFFIRMED.

***

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

1

. Because we affirm, we deny Appellee Vanessa Rivera’s motion for summary affir-mance as moot.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 76 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 76

To amend Senate Resolution 338 (which establishes the Select Committee 
   on Ethics) to change the membership of the select committee from 
               members of the Senate to private citizens.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             February 1 (legislative day, January 30), 1995

Mr. Helms submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                 Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
To amend Senate Resolution 338 (which establishes the Select Committee 
   on Ethics) to change the membership of the select committee from 
               members of the Senate to private citizens.

    Resolved, That (a) subsection (a) of the first section of Senate 
Resolution 338, agreed to July 23, 1964 (88th Congress, 2d session), is 
amended to read as follows:
    ``(a)(1) There is hereby established a permanent select committee 
of the Senate to be known as the Select Committee on Ethics (referred 
to in this resolution as the `Select Committee') consisting of 6 
members all of whom shall be private citizens. Three members of the 
Select Committee shall be selected by the Majority Leader and 3 shall 
be selected by the Minority Leader. Each member of the Select Committee 
shall serve 6 years except that the Majority Leader and the Minority 
Leader when making their initial appointments shall each designate 1 
member to serve only 2 years and 1 member to serve only 4 years. At 
least 2 members of the Select Committee shall be retired Federal 
judges, and at least 2 members of the Select Committee shall be former 
members of the Senate. Members of the Select Committee may be 
reappointed.
    ``(2) The Select Committee shall select a chairman and a vice 
chairman from among its members.
    ``(3) Members of the Select Committee shall serve without 
compensation but shall be entitled to travel and per diem expenses in 
accordance with the rules and regulations of the Senate.''.
    (b) Subsection (e) of the first section of Senate Resolution 338 
(as referred to in subsection (a)) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 255 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 255

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 13, 1998

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the Greater Washington 
                            Soap Box Derby.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF SOAP BOX DERBY RACES ON CAPITOL GROUNDS.

    The Greater Washington Soap Box Derby Association (hereinafter in 
this resolution referred to as the ``Association'') shall be permitted 
to sponsor a public event, soap box derby races, on the Capitol Grounds 
on July 11, 1998, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Rules and Administration of the 
Senate may jointly designate.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS.

    The event to be carried out under this resolution shall be free of 
admission charge to the public and arranged not to interfere with the 
needs of Congress, under conditions to be prescribed by the Architect 
of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board; except that the 
Association shall assume full responsibility for all expenses and 
liabilities incident to all activities associated with the event.

SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

    For the purposes of this resolution, the Association is authorized 
to erect upon the Capitol Grounds, subject to the approval of the 
Architect of the Capitol, such stage, sound amplification devices, and 
other related structures and equipment as may be required for the event 
to be carried out under this resolution.

SEC. 4. ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.

    The Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board are 
authorized to make any such additional arrangements that may be 
required to carry out the event under this resolution.

SEC. 5. APPLICABILITY OF PROHIBITIONS.

    Nothing in this resolution may be construed to waive the 
applicability of the prohibitions established by section 4 of the Act 
of July 31, 1946 (40 U.S.C. 193d; 60 Stat. 718), concerning sales, 
displays, and solicitations on the Capitol Grounds.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 12, 1998.

            Attest:

                                                ROBIN H. CARLE,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Sterling H. McDonald, Chief Financial Officer of Natural Gas Systems, Inc.,
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Natural Gas Systems,
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 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 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 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 Registrant's Board of
Directors:

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: November 14, 2005

                                             /s/ STERLING  H. MCDONALD
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Sterling H. McDonald
                                             Chief Financial Officer
#### Harold D. HARDEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Dwight NEVEN, Warden; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-15755

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted November 15, 2017 *

Filed November 20, 2017

Harold D. Harden, Pro Se

D. Randall Gilmer, Deputy Attorney General, Theresa Haar, AGNV — Office of the Nevada Attorney General (Las Vegas), Las Vegas, NV, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

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

MEMORANDUM **

Nevada state prisoner Harold D. Harden appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Williams v. Paramo,*775 F.3d 1182, 1191 (9th Cir. 2015) (summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies); *Guatay Christian Fellowship v. County of San Diego,*670 F.3d 957, 970 (9th Cir. 2011) (cross-motions for summary judgment). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record. *Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP,*534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir. 2008). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment for defendants on Harden’s retaliation and excessive force claims because Harden failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he properly exhausted his available administrative remedies as required by the Prison Litigation Reform Act, or whether administrative remedies were effectively unavailable. *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 *proper*
      *554
      *ly*(so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits).” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); *Williams,*775 F.3d at 1191 (a prisoner who does not exhaust administrative remedies must show that “there is something particular in his case that made the existing and generally available administrative remedies effectively unavailable to him”); *Griffin v. Arpaio,*557 F.3d 1117, 1120-21 (9th Cir. 2009) (“[A] grievance suffices if it alerts the prison to the nature of the wrong for which redress is sought.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

Summary judgment for defendants on Harden’s access-to-courts claim was proper because Harden failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether defendants caused an actual injury. *See Lewis v. Casey,*518 U.S. 343, 348-49, 354-55, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (setting forth elements of an access-to-courts claim and actual injury requirement).

We do not consider issues not specifically and distinctly raised in the opening brief. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EX-10.6



 Exhibit 10.6 

Regalwood Global Energy Ltd. 

1001 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. 

Suite 220 South 
 Washington, D.C.
20004 
 _______________, 2017 

Ladies and Gentlemen: 
 This letter will confirm
our agreement that, commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the registration statement (the “Registration Statement”) for the initial public offering (the
“IPO”) of the securities of Regalwood Global Energy Ltd. (the “Company”) and continuing until the earlier of (i) the consummation by the Company of an initial business combination or (ii) the
Company’s liquidation (in each case as described in the Registration Statement) (such earlier date hereinafter referred to as the “Termination Date”), CIEP Sponsor Ltd. shall make available to the Company certain office
space and administrative and support services as may be required by the Company from time to time, at 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Suite 220 South, Washington, D.C. 20004. In exchange therefore, the Company shall pay CIEP Sponsor Ltd. $20,000 per
month on the Effective Date and continuing monthly thereafter until the Termination Date. 
 CIEP Sponsor Ltd. hereby agrees that it does
not have any right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies that may be set aside in a trust account (the “Trust Account”) that may be established upon the consummation of the IPO and will not seek recourse
against the Trust Account for any reason whatsoever. 
  

			
	 Very truly yours,

 
 Regalwood Global Energy Ltd.

		
	By:	 	 
		 	 Name:
 Title:



 AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY: 

CIEP Sponsor Ltd. 

			
	
		
	By:	 	 
		 	 Name:
 Title:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Dean MEARS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-7163

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: January 8, 2018

Decided: January 29, 2018

*242Richard Dean Mears, Appellant Pro Se. Joan Brodish Childs, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Richard Dean Mears appeals the district court’s order overruling Mears’ objection to the writ of continuing garnishment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.*
      *United States v. Mears,*No. 1:04-cr-00212-WO-1 (M.D.N.C. Aug. 25, 2017). 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*

Mears takes issue with the district court’s statement that he did not claim that his 401(k) retirement plan is exempt property. Any error was harmless, because such retirement plan benefits are subject to garnishment for criminal restitution. *United States v. DeCay,*620 F.3d 534, 541 (5th Cir. 2010); *United States v. Hosking,*567 F.3d 329, 334 (7th Cir. 2009); *United States*v. *Novak,*476 F.3d 1041, 1053 (9th Cir. 2007); *United States v. Irving,*452 F.3d 110, 126 (2d Cir. 2006),
III

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 109

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 17, 1997

Received and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the many talents of the actor Jimmy Stewart

and honoring the contributions he made to the Nation.

Whereas James M. (‘‘Jimmy’’) Stewart made more than 80

films including comedies, westerns, and dramas of suspense;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart won an Academy Award for best

performance by an actor in 1940 for his performance in

‘‘The Philadelphia Story’’ and received four other Oscar

nominations for his performances in ‘‘Mr. Smith Goes to
2

HCON 109 RFS

Washington’’, ‘‘It’s a Wonderful Life’’, ‘‘Harvey’’, and

‘‘Anatomy of a Murder’’;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart received a Screen Actors Guild

Award in 1968 for ‘‘fostering the finest ideals of the acting profession’’; the American Film Institute’s eighth life

achievement award in 1980, a Kennedy Center Honor in

1983, a special Academy Award in 1984 for ‘‘50 years

of meaningful performances’’ and ‘‘for his high ideals,

both on and off the screen’’, and the annual tribute by

the Film Society of Lincoln Center in 1990;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart appeared in a number of television

shows and Broadway plays and received a Tony Award;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart’s poetry was compiled into his 1989

book entitled ‘‘Jimmy Stewart and his Poems’’;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart enlisted in the military and served

during World War II as operations officer, chief of staff,

and squadron commander of the Second Combat Wing of

the U.S. Eighth Air Force in England;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart’s military decorations include two

Distinguished Flying Crosses, the Air Medal, multiple

oak leaf clusters, six battle stars, and the Croix de

Guerre with Palm;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart attained the rank of colonel during

World War II and the rank of brigadier general in 1959,

making him the highest ranking entertainer in the American military;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart was active in national politics in his

later years and was a close personal friend of former

President Ronald Reagan;

Whereas Jimmy Stewart testified before Congress in 1988 in

favor of a bill that was later enacted to require film ex-
3

HCON 109 RFS

hibitors and distributors to disclose to the public whether

certain culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant

films had been colorized or otherwise altered from the

original; and

Whereas in 1985 President Ronald Reagan awarded Jimmy

Stewart the Nation’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That Congress recognizes the many talents

3 of the late James M. (‘‘Jimmy’’) Stewart and honors the

4 artistic, military, and political contributions he made to

5 the Nation.

Passed the House of Representatives September 16,

1997.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.
Exhibit 10.11.1


                  Schedule of Omitted Documents in the Form of
                   Exhibit 10.11, including Material Detail in
                 Which Such Documents Differ from Exhibit 10.11
               -------------------------------------------------

     1.   Directors  Stock Option  Agreement,  dated March 31, 1998,  with Jerry
          Rosner

     2.   Directors Stock Option  Agreement,  dated March 31, 1998, with Stanley
          Weinreb

     3.   Directors Stock Option  Agreement,  dated March 31, 1998, with Stanley
          Raphael


          The form of the  documents  listed  above does not differ in  material
          detail  from the form of  Exhibit  10.11  except  with  respect to the
          identity of the director.



                                      -22-

<PAGE>
No. D-2642.

#### In re Disbarment of Needle.

Disbarment entered. [For earlier order herein, see 566 U. S. 932.]
Exhibit 10.24




Waiver and Release
 
  This Waiver (this “Waiver”) is made as of October 27, 2010, between CleanTech Innovations, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), and Dianfu Lu (“Lu”).
  In consideration of the release by the Company below, Lu hereby consents and agrees to waive all rights to the payment of RMB 7,742,400 due under the Approval on Share Transfer Regarding Creative Bellows Manufacture Co., Ltd., dated September 15, 2010, from the Department of Foreign Trade and Economic Cooperation of Liaoning Province.
  In consideration for the execution of the Waiver, Company does hereby release and forever discharge Lu and his successors and assigns of and from all claims, actions, causes of action, liability, demands and damages of whatever name or nature, whether at law or in equity, in any manner having arisen, arising, or to arise from the beginning of time to the date hereof.
  
   CLEANTECH INNOVATIONS, INC.
  /s/ Bei Lu
 By: Bei Lu
 Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
   /s/ Dianfu Lu
 Dianfu Lu
June 7, 2012 To: California Department of Pesticide Regulation Re: Proposed Regulatory Action, DPR 12-001 Volatile Organic Compounds in the San Joaquin Valley in the Nonattainment Area Prohibition on use of high VOC formulations of oxyfluorfen herbicide during May 1 – Oct 31
Sent: Via email to dpr12001@cdpr.ca.gov This letter is in reference to the proposed action that would require use prohibitions of high VOC formulations of oxyfluorfen herbicide on almonds in the Southern San Joaquin Valley from May 1 – October 31 in the event the emission limit is triggered.
Attached is to this email is a letter written by Dr. Bradley Hanson (UC Cooperative Extension Weed Specialist, UC Davis), “Hanson comments to CDPR re oxyfluorfen_053012.pdf”. The Almond Board of California supports his proposal outlined in this letter for an additional exemption to section 6884 section (b) to include low rates of high-VOC formulations of oxyfluorfen for spring and summer orchard weed control prior to almond harvest.
His letter very well supports the above proposal:

 Need for weed control using EC formulations of oxyfluorfen prior to mechanical harvest

 Current lack alternatives and the issues include:

o Resistance of key weeds to glyphosate

o Lack of efficacy of low VOC oxyfluorfen formulations for this use post emergence use pattern

o Lack of efficacy data on potential alternat ives. The above exemption would permit use of EC formulations of oxyfluorfen while data on efficacy and best use practice for alternatives is generated. These studies are already underway.

 The proposed low oxyfluorfen rate is consistent with the supplemental label for tank mixing oxyfluorfen and is significantly lower than standard practice. The proposed oxyfluorfen rate is 0.125 lb. a.i./A versus current practice of 0.25 to 0.375 lb. a.i./A.
Do not hesitate to contact me or Dr. Hanson for any further background.

Robert K. Curtis Associate Director, Agricultural Affairs 209.604.0385 rcurtis@almondboard.com
Cc. Dr. Bradley Hanson