alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 51 (Monday, March 17, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 12544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-6575]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army

32 CFR Parts 543 and 544


Promotion of Rifle Practice and Civilian Marksmanship (Removal)

AGENCY: Office of the Administrative Assistant, U.S. Army, DOD.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document removes the Department of the Army's Promotion 
of Rifle Practice and Civilian Marksmanship regulations codified in 32 
CFR. The parts have served the purpose for which they were intended and 
are no longer necessary. This is based on the transfer of the Civilian 
Marksmanship from conduct by the Department of the Army to conduct by 
the Corporation for the Promotion of Rifle Practice and Firearms Safety 
as referenced in the Federal Register notice Vol 61 No 209, page 55621, 
dated 28 Oct 96.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 17, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sandra R. Riley, Director, Policy and Plans, Office of the 
Administrative Assistant, 105 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310-0105, 
phone (703) 697-6900.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Removal of parts is based on the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, Public Law 104-106 
Title XVI, section 1601, 1611-1624 which has been completed.

List of Subjects

32 CFR Part 543

    Arms and munitions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Surety bonds.

32 CFR Part 544

    Arms and munitions, Decorations, medals, awards.

PARTS 543 AND 544--[REMOVED AND RESERVED]

    Accordingly, 32 CFR parts 543 and 544 are removed.
Gregory D. Showalter,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-6575 Filed 3-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M
#### IN RE: Albert S. AN and Lauri I. An, Debtors. *772Albert S. An and Lauri I. An, Appellants, v. Il Yoon Kwon and Coastal Asset Management, LLC, Appellees.

No. 16-60071

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 6, 2018 *

Filed February 8, 2018

James Alexander Dumas, Jr., Esquire, Senior Attorney, Christian T. Kim, Attorney, Dumas *&*Kim, APC, Los Angeles, CA, for Appellants

Robert Huttenhoff, Ryan Daniel O’Dea, Leonard M. Shulman, Attorneys, Shulman Hodges *&*Bastían LLP, Irvine, CA, for Appellees

Before: GRABER and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and MARBLEY,** 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 Algenon L. Marbley, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Albert S. and Lauri I. An, husband and wife, appeal a Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) decision affirming in part the bankruptcy court’s holding that a state-court judgment was not' dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) as to Albert, but reversing that determination as to Lauri. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d) and affirm.

1. The Ans argue that 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) does not apply, because the judgment was the result of a landlord-tenant .dispute that “sounded in contract.” But the ejectment action that gave rise to the judgment arose “out of alleged unlawful possession by the defendant[s], and sounds in tort.” *Zettle v. Gillmeister,*64 Cal.App. 669, 222 P. 645, 646 (1923); *see also Petralia v. Jercich (In re Jercich),*238 F.3d 1202, 1205 (9th Cir. 2001) (holding that § 523(a)(6) excepts from discharge debts arising from *“tortious conduct”*(quoting *Snoke v. Riso (In re Riso),*978 F.2d 1151, 1154 (9th Cir. 1992))).

2. The BAP did not err in concluding that the judgment was not dischargeable against Albert. The bankruptcy court reasonably determined that the injury to Kwon was “willful and malicious.” *See*11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). Substantial evidence supported the court’s determination that the injury was willful because Albert “did not believe that there was an oral agreement to own an interest in the property,” and “his intention ... was ... to continue riding the gravy train for as long as possible at Mr. Kwon’s expense.” *See In re Jercich,*238 F.3d at 1208 (holding that “the willful injury requirement ... is met when it is shown either that the debtor had a subjective motive to inflict the injury *or*that the debtor believed that injury was substantially certain to occur”). The Ans do not “specifically and distinctly” contest on appeal that the injury was malicious, so we deem that issue waived. *Miller v. Fair**773*child Indus., Inc.,*797 F.2d 727, 738 (9th Cir. 1986).1

AFFIRMED.

***

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

1

. The Ans also argue that the bankruptcy court erred in finding the judgment non-dis-chargeable as to Lauri. But the BAP reversed that portion of the bankruptcy court’s order, and there is no cross-appeal.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

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

 ** The Honorable Robert E. Cowen, Senior United States Circuit Judge

for the Third Circuit, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LORENZO LEDEZMA-SANDOVAL,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 05-77082

Agency No. A017-985-714

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted December 4, 2006

San Francisco, California

Before: D.W. NELSON and BERZON, Circuit Judges, and COWEN, Judge.** 

Lorenzo Ledezma-Sandoval petitions for review of a decision of the Board

of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal of a final order of removal.

FILED

APR 02 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

The BIA erred in holding that Ledezma was removable as an aggravated

felon by reason of his conviction for second-degree murder in 1981 because “8

U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) [providing that an alien convicted of an aggravated

felony is deportable] does not apply to convictions . . . that occurred prior to

November 18, 1988.” Ledezma-Galicia v. Holder, No. 03-73648, 2010 WL

1172469, at *16 (9th Cir. Mar. 29, 2010). Because we hold that the 1981

conviction cannot serve as a basis for removal, we do not reach Ledezma’s

alternative arguments regarding his eligibility for a waiver of that ground of

removal. 

We grant the petition and remand to the BIA for further proceedings.

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
WITH JACQUES S. MOSKOVIC

THIS AGREEMENT ("Agreement") dated as of April 18, 1997 is enteredinto by
JACQUES S. MOSKOVIC ("Moskovic"), FAIRCHILD FRANCE, INC.("Fairchild
France") and Fairchild CDI, S.A. (previously known as COMPANY POURLE
DEVELOPPEMENT INDUSTRIEL) ("CDI").

                                    RECITALS

By Employment Agreement between Moskovic and Fairchild France datedJanuary 12,
1995, amended by First Amendment to Employment Agreement(collectively, the
Original Agreement"), Moskovic is employed by Fairchild France to serve as
Manager of Coordination, reporting directly to The Fairchild Corporation
("Fairchild").

Without limitation, Moskovic's duties under the Original Agreementinclude the
supervision of Fairchild's "Fairchild Technologies" division inFrance.

Since the date of the Original Agreement, Fairchild acquiredsubstantially all of
the stock of CDI.  CDI is now part of Fairchild's "Fairchild Technologies
"division in France.

The parties wish to amend the Original Agreement to includecompensation to
Moskovic for his services with respect to CDI.  As between Fairchild Franceand
Moskovic, this Agreement constitutes an amendment to the Original Agreement,
and,as between CDI and Moskovic, this Agreement constitutes an Employment
Agreement.

                           AGREEMENT

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

1.  Additional Duties.  In addition to his duties under theOriginal Agreement,
Moskovic shall serve as Technical Manager and Chairman of CDI, reportingdirectly
to Fairchild's Chairman of the Board.

2.  Compensation.  In addition to the compensation provided for inthe Original
Agreement, as consideration for his services with respect to CDI(or successor),
monthly installments in accordance with CDI's usual payrollpolicies:

a)  For Fiscal Year 1995:  408,000 French Francs per year (receiptof which is
hereby acknowledged by Moskovic).

b)  For Fiscal Year 1996:  408,000 French Francs per year (receiptof which is
hereby acknowledged by Moskovic).

c)  For Fiscal Year 1997:  408,000 French Francs per year.

d)  Thereafter, base salary for CDI services will be reviewedannually by the
Fairchild Board of Directors (Compensation Committee), and adjustments (ifany)
to Moskovic's base salary will be at the discretion of the Fairchild Board of
Directors (Compensation Committee).

3.  Payment of Compensation.  The above-indicated compensationshall be paid by
CDI.

4.  Retroactive Date.  This Agreement is retroactive to thecommencement of
Fiscal Year 1995.

5.  Ratification.  Except as specifically modified hereby, theOriginal Agreement
remains in full force and effect.  References in the Original Agreement to"this
Agreement" shall mean the Original Agreement as modified by the First Amendment
to Employment Agreement and as further modified by this Agreement.

6.  Amendment.  This Agreement may not be amended except by writtenagreement of
all the parties hereto (Fairchild France, CDI and Moskovic).


FAIRCHILD FRANCE, INC.            FAIRCHILD CDI, S.A.

By:  Donald E. Miller            By: Jacques S. Moskovic
     Vice President                  Director
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 54 (Thursday, March 20, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13359]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7101]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[CO-001-0015b; FRL-5700-4]


Clean Air Act Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation 
Plan; Colorado; Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Designation of 
Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve revisions to Colorado's prevention of 
significant deterioration (PSD) permitting requirements in Regulation 
No. 3, which were submitted as revisions to the State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) by the Governor on August 1, 1996. EPA also proposes to 
delete the TSP area designation table and to revise the PM-10 area 
designation table in 40 CFR part 81 for Colorado. In addition, EPA 
proposes to amend the language in 40 CFR 52.343(a)(3) to clarify 
Colorado's PSD permitting authority.
    In the final rules section of this Federal Register, the EPA is 
approving the State's SIP revision and promulgating these amendments as 
a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views 
this action as noncontroversial and anticipates no adverse comments. A 
detailed rationale for the action is set forth in the direct final 
rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this proposed 
rule, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this rule. If 
EPA receives adverse comments, then the direct final rule will be 
withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a 
subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on this notice. Any parties 
interested in commenting on this notice should do so at this time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by 
April 21, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Vicki 
Stamper, 8P2-A, at the EPA Regional Office listed below. Copies of the 
documents relevant to this proposed rule are available for public 
inspection during normal business hours at the following locations: Air 
Program, Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, 
Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466; and Colorado Department of 
Public Health and Environment, Air Pollution Control Division, 4300 
Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, Colorado 80202-1530.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vicki Stamper, 8P2-A, at (303) 312-
6445.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the information provided in the Direct 
Final notice of the same title which is located in the Rules Section of 
this Federal Register.

    Dated: February 27, 1997.
Patricia D. Hull,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-7101 Filed 3-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
DAVID O ’ DONNELL, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, LLC, ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants

- Appellees

______________________

2022

- 1768

______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas in No. 3:19

- cv

- 02687

- S

- BK, Judge Karen Gren Scholer.

______________________
ON MOTION

______________________
Before L OURIE , C HEN , and S TARK , Circuit Judge s

. P ER C URIAM

. O R D E R
In response to the court’s June 27, 2022, order to showcause why this appeal from a civil action concerning an automobile accident should not be dismissed or tra nsferred, David O’Donnell moves unopposed to transfer the appeal Case: 22-1768 Document: 18 Page: 1 Filed: 08/26/2022O ’ DONNELL v. AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM , LLC 2

to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, stating that he named this court in error in his notice of appeal and that he intended to appeal to the Fifth Circuit

. Upon consideration thereof

, I T I S O RDERED T HAT : The motion is granted. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, this case and all transmittals are transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

.

August 26 , 2022 Date F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court Case: 22-1768 Document: 18 Page: 2 Filed: 08/26/2022
No. 11-10888.

#### Reyes *v.*Gonzales, Warden, et al.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                               3
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   701
<PP&E>                                          14,452
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (9,714)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   5,640
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           28,621
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       843,654
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,637,327)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     5,640
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    22
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  106,800
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,595
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (128,373)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (128,373)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (128,373)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                  EXHIBIT 21.1

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

      The following corporations were subsidiaries of the Company as of December
31, 2005:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                           JURISDICTION
                                                OF
                  NAME                     INCORPORATION
                  ----                     -------------
<S>                                        <C>
OptiCare Merger Sub, Inc.(1)                 Delaware
USV Merger Sub, Inc.(1)                      Delaware
</TABLE>

(1)   Formed solely for the purpose of completing a merger. Merged out of
      existence on March 6, 2006.
#### LUIS OCASIO *v.*COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

(AC 34452)

DiPentima, C. X, and Lavine and Alvord, Js.

Argued March 5—

officially released March 25, 2014

Petitioner’s appeal from the Superior Court in the judicial district of Tolland, *Newson, J.*

Per Curiam.

The appeal is dismissed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                       66,501
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     24,164
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         142,894
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        26,000
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                   3,222
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 262,781
<COMMON>                                        19,039
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      164,396
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                             59,528
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 242,963
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                 0
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                        0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                  19,818
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  262,781
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      280,803
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            11,900
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                      93,819
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     230,969
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         49,834
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               7,303
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  45,237
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                    45,237
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   45,237
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        95,193
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          66,653
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          29,248
<SECURITIES>                                     4,236
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,467
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (479)
<INVENTORY>                                      9,469
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                64,086
<PP&E>                                          24,737
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,659
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 103,420
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,629
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             8
<OTHER-SE>                                      87,982
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   103,420
<SALES>                                         51,790
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                51,790
<CGS>                                           25,397
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   47,693
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (989)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (109)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,583
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,733
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (150)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (150)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.02)
        

</TABLE>